Category: VAT

Dilip and Another (T/A Oaktree Lane (Selly Oak) Post Office and Stores) v Customs and Excise: VDT 12 May 2005

VAT – INPUT TAX – evidence for claim – whether tax incurred on supply for the purpose of a business – VAT paid in respect of introductory payment for licence to run post office held not to be deductible in respect of general stores business carried on at same address – appeal against assessment to recover tax dismissed
VAT – CONSIDERATION – vouchers – commission payable on telephone cards (face-value vouchers) pre-Finance Act 2003 – whether output tax due – appeal against assessments allowed by consent
VAT – PENALTIES – misdeclaration- conduct in deducting input tax reasonable – appeal against penalty assessment allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19078

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228541

Canterbury Hockey Club and Canterbury Ladies Hockey Club v Customs and Excise: VDT 25 May 2005

VDT APPEAL – Strike-out – Appeal by recipient of supplies – Appellant claims exemption – Supplier withdrew appeal against assessment in respect of those supplies – Appellant as recipient of supplies wishes to contend that supplies are exempt – Whether principles of proportionality require Appellant to show it has a sufficient interest – No – Whether supplier’s withdrawal results in a section 85 agreement binding Appellant – No – Whether abuse of process for Appellant to pursue its appeal – No – Whether doctrine of res judicata prevents Appellant from pursuing its appeal – No – Whether rule 19(3) Tribunals Rules enable the Tribunal to refuse to entertain the appeal unless the supplier is joined – No – Application dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19086

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228537

Garde v Customs and Excise: VDT 25 Apr 2005

VDT DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Reasonable excuse – Pressure on taxpayer – Alleged blackmail of taxpayer by Inland Revenue – Alleged misfeasance by Court Service – Taxpayer’s time taken in resisting alleged wrongs – Whether reasonable excuse – No – Taxpayer’s wife acting as book-keeper – Taxpayer’s wife’s illness – Whether reasonable excuse – Not after expiration of two accounting periods
DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Legality – Whether Commissioners’ invocation of default surcharge regime violated taxpayer’s Magna Carta rights – No – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19037

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228529

IDT Card Services Ireland Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Customs and Excise: Admn 21 Dec 2004

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 3188 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – Revenue and Customs v IDT Card Services Ireland Ltd CA 27-Jan-2006
Under the Marleasing principle, or principle of conforming interpretation, the domestic court of a member state must interpret its national law so far as possible in the light of the wording and purpose of the Directive in question. However this . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.226927

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Littlewoods Organisation plc: CA 26 Oct 2001

Agents of the taxpayer received commission on sales. They could take it in cash, or at an enhanced rate on goods purchased. How was the tax to be calculated on the goods sold to the agent? The right to take goods at the enhanced rate arose from a combination of her appointment as agent, and payments made in respect of the primary supply. There was no direct link between the right to take goods at the enhanced rate, and a service she had provided, and there was no basis for treating the services as a non-monetary element in the consideration for the supply of the secondary goods, and no basis for allowing for a non-monetary element under article 11 when ascertaining the taxable amount to be attributed to the supply. The commission in goods had to be treated as a price discount.

Judges:

Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Chadwick and Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

Times 07-Nov-2001, Gazette 29-Nov-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1542, [2002] BVC 71, [2001] BTC 5608, [2001] STC 1568, [2002] RTR 16, [2001] STI 1381

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Littlewoods Organisation Plc ChD 4-Jul-2000
The enhanced commission paid to mail order catalogue agents for supplying services to the company and which was to be set off against goods purchased by the agents themselves from the mail order company were vatable. The commission earned . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Littlewoods Organisation Plc ChD 4-Jul-2000
The enhanced commission paid to mail order catalogue agents for supplying services to the company and which was to be set off against goods purchased by the agents themselves from the mail order company were vatable. The commission earned . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Agency

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.166843

Finanzamt Arnsberg v Stadt Sundern (Taxation): ECJ 26 May 2005

ECJ Sixth Directive – Article 25 – Common flat-rate scheme for farmers – Grant of hunting licences within the framework of a municipal forestry undertaking – Concept of ‘agricultural service’.

Citations:

C-43/04, [2005] EUECJ C-43/04

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture, VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225317

Messenger Leisure Developments Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 26 May 2005

The taxpayer supplied sports goods to members of a proprietary golf club.
Held: The company was not acting to supply sports facilities. The commercial purpose of the trade undermined the company’s claim to exemption.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 648, Times 14-Jun-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Kennemer Golf and Country Club v Staatssecretaris van Financien, Zoological Society of London v Commissioners of Customs and Excise Case ECJ 21-Mar-2002
The bodies sought exemption from certain elements of VAT as ‘non-profit’ making or ‘voluntary’ bodies. Their activities included trading activities, but they did not set out to make a profit overall.
Held: For certain exemptions, the term . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225285

RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Revenue and Customs: VDT 3 May 2005

VDT Applications – opposed motion to sist part of the proceedings in the appeal pending an ECJ Decision: Application for an order for disclosure of documents – necessity of documents, relevance to issue reasonableness of request. Applications refused.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19055

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At VDT (1) – RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Customs and Excise VDT 16-Nov-2004
VDT Application: Interlocutory Hearing – Jurisdiction – whether appeal raised in Edinburgh should be transmitted to London in respect that there was another connected appeal there – whether Appellants with . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh SCS 13-Jan-2006
SCS The taxpayer, a German subsidiary of a UK bank, carried on a banking and leasing business in Germany. It did not have a place of establishment in the UK. It was registered in the UK for VAT as a . .
At VDT (2) – RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Revenue and Customs VDT 24-Jul-2007
VDT VAT – deduction of input tax – leasing of cars within UK by German subsidiary company – cars purchased within UK, remaining there and subject to VAT in UK – leasing deemed to be supply of services in Germany . .
At VDT (2) – Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings ECJ 30-Sep-2010
ECJ Opinion – Interpretation of Article 17(3)(a) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Transactions carried out with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage – Provision of vehicle leasing services in the United Kingdom . .
At VDT (2) – Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings ECJ 22-Dec-2010
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Right to deduction – Purchase of vehicles and use for leasing transactions – Differences between the tax regimes of two Member States – Prohibition of abusive practices
‘taxable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225168

Sawyer v Customs and Excise: VDT 25 Apr 2005

VDT PENALTY – EVASION – Commissioners attribute dishonest conduct of company to a named officer – PRELIMINARY ISSUE– – Notice of liability to penalty – validity of notice of assessment – Appeal dismissed on this point –
MAIN ISSUE – conduct involving dishonesty – liability of director/secretary – dishonest conduct proved on a balance of probabilities- other directors’ acquiescence in dishonesty also a factor – proportionality taken into account – degree of culpability resulted in further mitigation of reduced penalty by 75 per cent – Appeal partially allowed VATA 1994 ss 60, 61, 70 and 76 – Human Rights Act 1998 Sch 1, Pt II, art.1.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19035

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225155

Inward Treasure (UK) Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 13 Apr 2005

VDT VAT – REGISTRATION – appellant voluntarily registered with effect from agreed date prior to application for registration – appellant seeking retrospective alteration of date of registration to a different date whilst maintaining registration – alteration not catered for by VATA 1994 – appellant’s adviser claiming that he was misled by Customs in advice given over VAT help-line – no evidence to that effect – alleged misleading advice irrelevant in any event – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V19047

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225144

Lindsay Cars Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 8 Mar 2005

VDT EXEMPTION – Insurance transactions – Appellant selling cars as independent dealer – Sales promotion for Northern Ireland – During sales promotion period ‘on-the-road’ price of car increased – Customer provided with free insurance for first year wholly paid for by manufacturer – Additional insurance for a further year procured from insurer by Appellant – Whether for purposes of calculating VAT on sales of cars amount paid by customer to be reduced by amount paid by Appellant for additional insurance – Whether Appellant making supplies of insurance – Yes – Whether supplies made for consideration – Yes – Whether supply ancillary to supply of car – No – Appeal Allowed – EC Council Directive 77/388, Art 13B(a) – VAT Act 1994, Sch 9, Gp 2, item 3

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18970

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225111

Totel Distribution Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 24 Feb 2005

VDT VAT – input tax – alleged carousel fraud – Commissioners unable to establish circulation of payment without tribunal inferring that certain payments had been made to particular party in chain of transactions – tribunal unwilling to make necessary inferences – appeal allowed without tribunal hearing any evidence.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18956

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Totel Ltd v Revenue Customs VDT 19-May-2006
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – suspected carousel or MTIC fraud – input tax repayment withheld pending ECJ judgment in Optigen and others – input tax paid with repayment supplement shortly after release of . .
See Also – Totel Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The First Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) and Others Admn 24-Mar-2011
The claimant sought to appeal against refusal of relief from payment of sums assessed by way of penalty, on the basis of hardship. HMRC argued that the right of appeal underthe 2007 Act had been taken away by the 1994 Act. . .
See Also – Totel Distribution Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 31-Mar-2011
VAT – MTIC – contra-trading – clean chain broker – knew or should have known? – yes – appeal dismissed. . .
See Also – Totel Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The First-Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) and Another CA 31-Oct-2012
The appellant had requested a hardship allowance so as not to have to pay claimed VAT before the hearing of an appeal. That was refused, and the claimant now said that the rules restricting an appeal against such a refusal were unlawful.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225084

Dilip and Another (T/A Oaktree Lane (Selly Oak) Post Office and Strores) v Customs and Excise: VDT 18 Apr 2005

VDT VAT – INPUT TAX – evidence for claim – whether tax incurred on supply for the purpose of a business – VAT paid in respect of introductory payment for licence to run post office held not to be deductible in respect of general stores business carried on at same address – appeal against assessment to recover tax dismissed
VAT – CONSIDERATION – vouchers – commission payable on telephone cards (face-value vouchers) pre-Finance Act 2003 – whether output tax due – appeal against assessments allowed by consent
VAT – PENALTIES – misdeclaration- conduct in deducting input tax reasonable – appeal against penalty assessment allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19049

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225139

Empowerment Enterprises Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Feb 2005

Exempt Supplies – education; tuition given privately by teacher, who is director and employee of limited company; EC Sixth Directive Article 13A.1(j); whether properly implemented by domestic legislation by Value Added Tax Act 1994 Schedule 9 group 6 item 2; whether domestic legislation compatible with EC Sixth Directive; No; appeal allowed.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18963

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225074

Loyalty Management UK Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 6 Apr 2005

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – the Appellant operates the Nectar programme under which customers who purchase goods (called primary goods) from certain retailers receive points which they may use to acquire goods (called secondary goods) from other suppliers – the Appellant pays the supplier for the secondary goods – whether, when a customer acquires secondary goods from a supplier using his points, the supply of the secondary goods is to the customer – no – or to the Appellant – yes -whether there should be a request to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling – no – appeal allowed – VATA 1994 S 2; Art 234 EC
The Tribunal allowed an appeal by LMUK from a ruling made by the Commissioners of Customs and Excise in connection with the treatment for the purposes of VAT of payments made by LMUK in the course of operating the Nectar Loyalty Scheme. The issue was whether LMUK was entitled to recover, as input tax, the VAT element of the amount which it paid to suppliers who, under the Scheme, had agreed to accept Nectar points, or vouchers, in consideration for the supply of goods or services to members of the public. The Commissioners’ ruling was that LMUK was not entitled to do so: ‘There is no supply of redemption services between the Redeemers (Suppliers) and LMUK as regards the rewards fee. The payments made by LMUK to Redeemers represent third party consideration for supplies made by the Redeemers to their customers (the final consumers). Any amounts charged as VAT to LMUK by Redeemers cannot be recovered by LMUK as input tax’.

Judges:

Dr A N Brice

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19056

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 2, Art 24 EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At VDT – Revenue and Customs v Loyalty Management UK Ltd ChD 22-Jun-2006
The taxpayer operated a substantial loyalty reward scheme (Nectar) for assorted companies. The Revenue appealed against an order allowing the company to reclaim input VAT. The court was asked now: ‘what is the proper characteristic, for VAT . .
At VDT – Loyalty Management UK Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 5-Oct-2007
The company (LMUK) managed a loyalty scheme for retailers. Their customers were awarded point sunder the schem on purchasing items, and then redeeemed those points against other purchases. LMUK sought to recover input tax on the invoices it paid to . .
At VDT – Loyalty Management UK (Taxation) ECJ 7-Oct-2010
ECJ (prelimiary ruling) Sixth VAT Directive – Taxable amount – Sales promotion scheme – Loyalty rewards scheme allowing customers to earn points from traders and to redeem them for loyalty rewards – Payments made . .
At VDT – Loyalty Management UK (Taxation) ECJ 7-Oct-2010
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Taxable amount – Sales promotion scheme – Loyalty rewards scheme allowing customers to earn points from traders and to redeem them for loyalty rewards – Payments made by the operator of . .
At VDT – Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd SC 13-Mar-2013
The company managed a card loyalty scheme for retailers. The Revenue appealed against a decision that the company could reclaim VAT input tax on the goods purchased on the customers redeeming their points. The ECJ had decided that the service . .
At VDT – Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd SC 20-Jun-2013
Decisions about the application of the VAT system are highly dependent upon the factual situations involved. The case-law of the Court of Justice indicates that, when determining the relevant supply in which a taxable person engages, regard must be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225147

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 17 Oct 2001

The respondent controlled a VAT group of companies. Its shareholding in TDL was transferred to a charitable trust, and the Commissioners were informed that it was no longer a member of the group. The commissioners contended that it remained a member up to the end of the accounting period.
Held: The provisions of the Act relating to the termination of group membership, did not provide that it would be coterminous with the cesser of eligibility, and such a provision could not be implied.

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor, Lord Justice Buxton, And Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

Gazette 15-Nov-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1513, [2001] STC 1558, [2001] BVC 606, [2001] BTC 5531, [2001] STI 1359, [2002] 1 CMLR 3

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 43(5)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking, VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.166642

University College London v Revenue and Customs: VDT 1 May 2008

VAT – partial exemption special method – previous appeal determined by section 85 agreement – whether issue estoppel established – alternative contention of abuse of process – construction of section 85 agreement – direction that question precluded by issue estoppel

Citations:

[2008] UKVAT V20664

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.272950

Regina on the Application of Teleos Plc and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 2 Mar 2005

The taxpayer sought to challenge in Europe the ruling by the respondents that the mobile phones they supplied did not meet the criteria to be zero-rated for VAT. A decision would be unlikely before 2006. They sought judicial review now of the refusal of the commissioners to make an interim payment.
Held: There exists in rule 25.7 an ability in the courts to provide for an interim order of a nature not specifically provided for. Because a remedy existed, there was no infringement of the European rules. The rule set out the preconditions for such an order, and the applicant did not meet them.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Dyson Mr Justice Bennett

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 200, Times 09-Mar-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 25.7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Capital One Developments Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 4-Feb-2002
The company sought repayment of some 8 million pounds overpaid VAT from the Commissioners. That claim was yet to be determined, but the company sough an order for interim payments, on the basis that it could repay if necessary.
Held: Whilst . .
Cited – Garage Molenheide BVBA (C-286/94), Peter Schepens (C-340/95), Bureau Rik Decan-Business Research and Development NV (BRD) (C-401/95), Sanders BVBA (C-47/96) vBelgian State ECJ 18-Dec-1997
Sixth Directive (77/388/EEC) – Scope – Right to deduction of VAT – Retention of balance of VAT due – Principle of proportionality . .
Appeal from – Teleos Plc and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Customs and Excise Admn 6-May-2004
. .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Teleos Plc and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Customs and Excise Admn 6-May-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223278

National Provident Institution v Customs and Excise: VDT 18 Feb 2005

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax -Appellant made exempt supplies of finance (the sale of securities) outside the member states with a right to recovery of input tax (specified supplies) as well as taxable and exempt supplies – no goods or services supplied to the Appellant were used exclusively in making specified supplies – whether the input tax on goods or services used in part in making specified supplies was to be attributed to specified supplies by first estimating the percentage of employees engaged in all dealings with securities; then applying that percentage to the amount of residual input tax; and then reducing that amount by a further percentage which was calculated by reference to the values of specified supplies in relation to the value of total supplies of dealing in securities – no – or by reference to the proportion which the value of the specified supplies bore to the value of total supplies – yes – appeal on this issue allowed but figures not yet determined – VATA 1994 Ss 24-26; VAT (Input Tax) (Specified Supplies) Order 1992 SI 1992 No. 3123; VAT General Regulations 1995 SI 1995 No. 2518 Regs 101 to 103.
VALUE ADDED TAX – time limits – whether an assessment to recover a repayment of tax had been made within three years after the end of the prescribed accounting period – no – whether some assessments of tax were made within one year after evidence of facts sufficient to justify the making of the assessments came to the knowledge of Customs and Excise – no – whether some assessments of interest previously paid by Customs and Excise to the Appellant were made within two years after evidence of facts came to the knowledge of Customs and Excise – no – appeals on this issue allowed – VATA 1994 S73(2) and (6); s 77(1)(a); and s 78A(2)

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18944

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223181

Constructive Solutions (Contractors) Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 7 Feb 2005

VDT VAT – INPUT TAX – company in liquidation – claim for repayment of tax following deregistration for VAT – such claims by persons acting in a representative capacity discussed – held that claim properly rejected as time-barred – furthermore company dissolved since service of appeal by liquidator – liquidator lacking ‘locus standi’ in any event – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18930

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223174

Mytravel Group Plc v Customs and Excise: VDT 17 Feb 2005

VDT VAT – tour operator – use of TOMS to calculate output tax – appellant’s ability to choose method of calculating liability either by reference to all supplies or to those made wholly or partly within EU -provisions for timing of election – Notice 709/5 – whether ultra vires UK legislation and/or incompatible with arts 26 and 22(8) 6th Directive – alternatively, whether on facts appellant entitled to use single method of calculation in financial years covered by assessments – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18940

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223180

Families for Children v Customs and Excise: VDT 14 Feb 2005

VDT EXEMPT SUPPLIES – Welfare services – Independent profit-making foster agency – Supplies to local authorities – Whether supply of welfare services – Yes – VAT Act 1994 Schedule 9 Group item 9 – Whether supplied by ‘organization recognized as charitable’ by the laws of the UK – EC Sixth Directive Art 13.1(g) and (h) – Matter adjourned pending outcome of reference in Kingscrest Associates Ltd

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18937

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223176

Telewest Communications Plc Telewest (Publications) Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 10 Feb 2005

The taxpayers sold cable services which were liable to VAT through 28 subsidiaries, and supplied by a third party as part of the same service a listings magazine. They sought exemption from VAT for that part of the consideration related to the magazine.
Held: There had in effect to be a novation to convert the one contract between Telewest and its customer to two contracts, the additional contract being the one for the supply of the magazine. The intention was to make the publication a separate supply by a different company. This was lawful at common law, and the appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy Lady Justice Arden Sir Christopher Staughton

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 102, [2005] STC 481

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’) HL 13-Mar-2003
Cargo owners sought damages for their cargo which had been damaged aboard the ship. The contract had been endorsed with additional terms. That variation may have changed the contract from a charterer’s to a shipowner’s bill.
Held: The specific . .
Cited – Hart v Alexander 1837
The test for novation is whether there has been an acceptance which can be inferred from the acts and conduct of the customer. . .
Cited – Staatssecretaris van Financien v Heerma ECJ 27-Jan-2000
Sixth VAT Directive – Transactions between a partner and a partnership . .
Cited – Tolhurst v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900) Ltd HL 1903
Tolhurst had contracted to sell a quantity of chalk from his quarries to the Imperial Company for fifty years. The Imperial Company afterwards assigned the Contract and sold its land, works and business to the Associated Company, and went into . .
Appeal from – Telewest Communications Plc v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 19-Dec-2003
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Revenue and Customs v Debenhams Retail Plc CA 18-Jul-2005
The store introduced a system whereby when a customer paid by credit card, the charges made to them for card handling were expressed as a separate amount on the receipt. The store then said that VAT was payable only on the net amount allocated to . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Debenhams Retail Plc CA 18-Jul-2005
The store introduced a system whereby when a customer paid by credit card, the charges made to them for card handling were expressed as a separate amount on the receipt. The store then said that VAT was payable only on the net amount allocated to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222960

Freer and Another (T/A Shooting and Fishing) v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

VDT ASSESSMENT – Underdeclaration of takings of trader as gun dealer – Unidentified sums paid into business account – Sale of private collection of guns said by Appellant not to be part of business – No evidence of source of payments in to bank – Whether receipts of business – Appeal dismissed
PENALTY – Dishonest evasion – Underdeclaration of tax – Alleged that appellants recorded sales of standard-rated goods as zero-rated – Whether appellants acted dishonestly – No – Appeal allowed – VATA 1994 s. 60

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18921

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222670

3D Micro Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 17 Jan 2005

VDT ZERO-RATING – removal of goods to Republic of Ireland – documentary evidence failed to demonstrate that the goods had left the UK in accordance with the requirements of Customs Notice 703 – the goods assessed to VAT at standard rate – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18907

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222664

Sport in Desford v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

ZERO-RATING – value added tax – supply of the construction of a Clubhouse – whether for use by a charity – whether for use as a village hall or similarly in providing social or recreational facilities for a local community – appeal allowed – VATA 1994 s.30 and Schedule 8 Group 5 Item 2(a) and Note 6(b)

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18914

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222076

Grange Builders (Quainton) Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 17 Jan 2005

VDT VAT – Zero-rating of construction services supplied in the course of an approved alteration of a protected building – item 2 of Group 6 of Schedule 8, VATA 1994 – whether a barn which had been used as a garage before an approved alteration to it qualified as a garage within the statutory definition of a building designed to remain as or become a dwelling or number of dwellings, in Note (2) of Group 6, which is an ingredient in the statutory definition of protected building in Note (1) of Group 6 – whether instead it is required that a structure should have been built as a garage before it could qualify as a garage within the definition in Note (2) of Group 6 – held that use as a garage as a matter of fact and reality before an approved alteration was sufficient to qualify as a garage within the definition in Note (2), and that it was not required that the barn should have been built as a garage – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18905

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222071

RA Logan and Co v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

Adjournment: Appellant Solicitor: No reason for delay: Adjournment Refused. Default Surcharge: Late Notice of Appeals: Appeals admitted: Reasonable excuse: Reasons for failure to pay 1999-2004: Reasonable excuse accepted for part period: Appeal partly allowed: No expenses due to or by either party.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18919

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222074

Edinburgh’s Telford College v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

VDT Taxable persons – Further Education College – whether acting as a public authority or under private law regime – EC Sixth Directive Art 4.5 Input Tax – application of Lennartz to a partially exempt trader – fair and reasonable attribution.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18913

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222067

P and PR Ltd (T/A P and F Print Finishing) v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – security – VATA 1994 Sch 11 para 4(2)(a) – Appellant acquiring assets, trading name and premises from company in liquidation and with poor compliance record and continuing same trade – predecessor company and Appellant having same sole director – security properly demanded – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18916

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222073

Civil Service Pensioners Alliance v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

VDT VAT – exemption – pensioners’ alliance – whether a trade union or professional body – no – whether an organisation ‘with the aims of a trade union, philanthropic or civic nature’ within EC 6th Directive article 13A(f) and (l) – no – VATA 1994 Schedule 9 Group 9.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18911

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222066

Watson v Customs and Excise: VDT 7 Jan 2005

Value added tax – Item 2, Group 6 Sch 8 VATA 1994 – protected buildings -whether separate building used as part of house which is a listed building is the same building – no – C and E Comrs v Zielinski Bakerand Partners Ltd applied – whether building designed to become a dwelling consisting of self-contained living accommodation after the alteration – no – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18903

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222078

Spice of Lyefe v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – restaurant and take-away business – test meals and observations – whether evidence gleaned by Respondents reliable – yes – whether theft of takings by member of staff relevant – no – whether evidence of free meals adequate – no – no basis for reduction of amount assessed – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18918

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222075

GB (UK) Leisure Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 21 Jan 2005

VDT VAT – SECURITY – REQUIREMENT FOR – matrimonial breakdown – failure of business partnership between spouses – marriage difficulties not shown to be cause of failure of business – requirement for security reasonable and justified on basis that failure of previous business apparently commercial – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18915

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222069

Hotel Scandic Gasaback (Taxation): ECJ 20 Jan 2005

EJ Sixth VAT Directive – Articles 2, 5(6) and 6(2) – Provision of meals in a company canteen for a price lower than the cost price – Taxable amount

Citations:

C-412/03, [2005] EUECJ C-412/03, [2005] STC 1311, [2005] CEC 335, [2005] 1 CMLR 38, [2005] STI 138, [2007] BVC 391, [2007] BTC 5372, [2005] ECR I-743

Links:

Bailii

European, VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221550

Nicholas (T/A Pa Scaffolding) v Customs and Excise: VDT 4 Dec 2002

SUPPLY – Transfer of business as a going concern – Appellant transferred certain assets of his business – No written contract – No mention of transfer of goodwill or existing contracts – No provision for employees, debtors or creditors – Claim by purchaser for input tax – Whether transfer of business as a going concern – No – VAT (Special Provisions) Order 1995 – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2002] UKVAT V17943

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221402

Powerscreen Equipment Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 4 Dec 2002

MISDECLARATION PENALTY – Reasonable excuse – Mitigation – Clerical error – Figure for sales omitted significant amount – Whether reasonable excuse that Commissioners were slow in responding to Appellant’s letter – No – Whether mitigation – No – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2002] UKVAT V17946

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221403

Taylor Tunicliffe Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 31 Oct 2003

VDT BAD DEBT RELIEF – notification of bad debt relief claim not given to debtors as required by regulations – claim time-barred after 3 years 6 months – discretion of Commissioners to waive compliance with regulations not exercised – tribunal powerless to intervene – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18378

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221327

Conde Nast Publications Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 7 Dec 2004

VDT Value added tax – input tax – time limits – whether appellant able to claim unclaimed input tax incurred more than three years previously despite regulation 29(1A) of the Value Added Tax Regulations 1995

Judges:

Dr David Williams (Chairman)

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18869

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Regulations 1995 29(1A)

Cited by:

Appeal from – Conde Nast Publications Ltd v Customs and Excise ChD 10-Jun-2005
. .
At VDT – Conde Nast Publications Ltd v Customs and Excise CA 11-Jul-2006
The court was asked as to the time available to a taxpayer to make a claim for repayment of under-deducted input tax under regulation 29.
Held: Though it might itself feel some discomfort at an earlier judgment interpreting a judgment of the . .
At VDT – Conde Nast Publications Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 11-Jul-2006
Time limits for reclaim of VAT. The Court considered an argument that it should treat the Court of Appeal decision in Fleming (t/a Bodycraft) v Customs and Excise Commissioners [2006] STC 864 as inconsistent with EU law.
Held: Chadwick LJ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221107

Orginal Produce Company (Middlesbrough) Ltd v The Customs and Excise: VDT 9 Dec 2004

VDT DEFAULT SURCHARGE – tribunal barred in law from treating insufficiency of funds as reasonable excuse – non attendance of appellant – no reasonable excuse suggested for non-payment of tax by due date – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18860

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221126

Readman v Customs and Excise: VDT 8 Dec 2004

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – Default surcharges – failure to despatch returns and payments of VAT by the due dates – whether reasonable excuse within s.59(7) VATA 1994 – taxpayer suffering prolonged illness involving absence from work – taxpayer offered in advance to submit estimated returns but told not to do so by the Commissioners’ National Advice Service – reliance on this advice was the cause of the defaults – held that amounted to a reasonable excuse – Bowen v CandE Comrs [1987] VATTR 255 and CandE Comrs. v Steptoe [1992] STC 757 considered – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18862

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221129

Gohil and Co (Northampton) Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 24 Oct 2003

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – VAT invoices apparently genuine issued by unregistered traders or traders using false VAT numbers – supplies represented by invoices genuinely made and paid for – whether suppliers registrable – whether recipient of supply entitled to input tax credit – Commissioners’ discretion – appeal dismissed

Judges:

Colin Bishopp

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18361

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221304

Mike Kiernans Beer Tent Co Ltd (T/A Fish and Duck) v Customs and Excise: VDT 9 Sep 2003

VDT COSTS – Company appearing by director – Successful appellant claiming costs in respect of time spent by director and director’s wife in preparation and conduct of appeal – No legal qualification – Whether entitled to such costs – No – Application dismissed to that extent

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18310

Links:

Bailii

VAT, Costs

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221276

Gibbs v Customs and Excise: VDT 4 Aug 2003

VDT CIVIL EVASION PENALTY – claim to input tax without valid VAT invoices – trader’s belief in VAT status of the supplier – did the Appellant evade the payment of VAT – yes – was the evasion dishonest – yes – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18270

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221231

Wong and others v Customs and Excise: VDT 14 Jan 2004

VDT REGISTRATION – Underdeclaration – Suppression of takings – Calculation of suppressed takings – Compulsory registration – Effective date of registration – Whether mitigation allowed – No – Penalty for belated registration – Appeal dismissed – VATA 1994, ss 73(1), 67

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18445

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221156

Iliffe and Another (T/A Otterton Post Office) v Customs and Excise: VDT 14 Jan 2004

VDT ASSESSMENT – Over-claimed input tax – Work done to a listed building – Whether alteration or repair – Part of work related to private house – Whether VAT reasonable
LEGAL COSTS – Appellants ordered by court to pay building societies costs including VAT – Whether that VAT recoverable in hands of the Appellants – Civil Procedure Rules 1998 considered – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18444

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Construction

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221149

Sawyer v Customs and Excise: VDT 13 Dec 2004

VDT INPUT TAX – disallowed – Appellant registered in 2002 – only work done by him before April 2004 was repair and maintenance to his home which was owned jointly by himself and his wife -the Appellant did not render any invoices for these supplies but claimed input tax credit in respect of supplies made to him – whether supplies made to him were used for the purpose of any business carried on by him – no – appeal dismissed VATA 1994 S 24(1)

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18872

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221130

Holmwood House School Development v Customs and Excise: VDT 12 May 2003

VDT EXEMPTION – school granting peppercorn lease of site for proposed new building – lessee and constructor of school building entering into two licences to school and to associated partnership – whether exempt as leasing or letting of building – Article 13B Sixth Directive – Maierhofer (ECJ decision in Case C-315/00) considered – whether essential features of two separate licences together constitute joint leasing or letting of new school building – yes – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18130

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Maierhofer v Finanzamt Augsburg-Land ECJ 16-Jan-2003
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Letting of immovable property – Prefabricated building which can be dismantled and reassembled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221162

Robbins v Customs and Excise: VDT 27 Aug 2003

VDT INPUT TAX – Motor vehicle – Commissioner accept intended to be used for business purposes only – Whether Appellant intended to make it available for private use where insured for private use and kept on Appellant’s domestic premises – Upton followed -Appeal allowed

Judges:

Gort C

Citations:

[2003] UKVAT V18302

Links:

Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221248