The taxpayer carried paying passengers. The travel was zero-rated. They also supplied in-flight food, which the Commissioners sought to hold taxable as a separate supply.
Held: The motives of the tax-payer and traveller were irrelevant. The question was as to what was supplied for the fee charged. If the food was an integral part of the supply of transportation, it was zero-rated. The tribunal had not answered that question, but the court did and in the affirmative.
 STC 643
Dicta applid – British Railways Board v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 1977
The question of what is the supply, is, looking at all the circumstances objectively, what does the customer get, not why does he want it: ‘It cannot depend on the state of mind of any individual student by asking him or her: what did you pay the . .
Cited – Nell Gwynn House Maintenance Fund v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 15-Dec-1998
Trustees who managed a group of apartments argued that they did not themselves provide staff services to the tenants, but rather arranged for the staff to provide services to them.
Held: The contract providing cleaning and other services, by a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.194316