ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: VAT and Duties Tribunal, London – United Kingdom. Customs Code – Customs value of imported goods – Price of goods and buying commission – Reimbursement of duty payable on full amount
C-379/00, [2002] EUECJ C-379/00
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178418
VAT – INPUT TAX – partial exemption – whether standard method and special method produce fair and reasonable attribution of input tax – held yes – whether special method proposed by Appellant produces fairer and more reasonable result than standard method – held yes – appeal allowed
[2012] UKFTT 589 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.466172
OUTPUT TAX – Mixed supplies – Optician’s business – Amount to be properly attributed to standard rated supplies of spectacles – Proprietor, a dispensing optician, works full-time in business – Whether proper attribution can be based on proprietor’s drawings – VAT Act 1994 s.19(4)
[2004] UKVAT V18951
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.230218
The taxpayer sold golf clubs. As part of its service it offered to replace any golf club found not to comply with the rules of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club. The commissioners appealed a finding that the returned golf clubs were not a valuable consideration on which VAT was applicable.
Held: The company made the offer because such a club would be of nil value, and to comply with its obligations to the club. The offer to return a club was part of the consideration on the sale, but there was no additional value and no duty.
Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Robert Walker and Lady Justice Arden
Times 23-Aug-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1115
England and Wales
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174721
The company charged no VAT on its postage and packaging charged to mail order customers. The company had described it as an advance of the sums to be charged by Parcelforce.
Held: There was no separate contract between the end customer and Parcelforce, nor any consideration paid direct by the customer. The making of an automatic debit payment to Parcelforce did not make them agents to receive the consideration on behalf of Parcelforce for the customer. Appeal dismissed (Lord Mackay dissenting)
Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett and Lord Scott of Foscote
Times 31-Jul-2002, Gazette 19-Sep-2002, [2002] UKHL 33, [2002] BTC 5413, [2002] STI 1093, [2002] STC 1132, [2002] BVC 572, [2002] 1 WLR 2287, [2002] 3 CMLR 5
Value Added Tax Act 1994 19, Council Directive (77/338/EEC) 11
England and Wales
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v British Telecommunications Plc HL 11-Feb-1999
The cost of the delivery of a quantity of new cars from the factory or depot to the purchaser is incidental and ancillary to the supply of the cars themselves, and the VAT on delivery charges was not reclaimable by the purchasing company as Input . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Redrow Group Plc HL 11-Feb-1999
Where house builders had paid the estate agents’ fees for exchanged property on sales, the supply had been, at least in part, to the builder, and the builder could accordingly recover the agents’ VAT as input tax. A supplier could be treated as . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174393
The taxpayer bought a car for her business and sought to set off the input tax.
Held: In order to be able to set off input tax in this way, it had to be his intention at the time when it was purchased, to use the vehicle exclusively for business purposes. In this case on the purchase, it had been insured also for private use, and that intention could not be established. The actual use made did not retrieve the situation.
Times 27-May-2002, Gazette 30-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 520
VAT (Input Tax) Order 1992 (SI 1992 No 3222) 7(2G)(b), VAT (Input Tax) (Amendment)(No 3) Order 1995 (SI 1995 No 1666)
England and Wales
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171213
Taxpayers sought exemption from VAT for works to a building. The commissioners claimed that the main building was not a dwelling, and that therefore the outbuilding would not be exempt.
Held: The main building was listed, and the outbuilding was with in the curtilage as defined in the 1990 Act. Works to the outbuilding therefore attracted the same exemption as the main building. There appeared no proper reason to treat the outbuilding as a separate building.
Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Tuckey and Lord Justice Rix
Times 29-May-2002, Gazette 27-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 692, [2002] STC 829
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 1(5), Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 8 Grp 6
England and Wales
Appeal from – Zielinski Baker and Partners Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise 2001
‘Note (1)(a) of Group 6 provides that an essential feature of a protected building is that it is a listed building ‘within the meaning of’ the 1990 Act. A listed building ‘within the meaning of’ the 1990 Act is a building which falls within the . .
Appeal from – Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Zielinski Baker and Partners Limited HL 26-Feb-2004
The commissioners sought to charge to VAT charges for works which had been carried out to a building within the curtilage of a listed building. The taxpayer sought zero-rating.
Held: The outbuilding to which alterations were made must have . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171305
Lord Kirkwood
[2001] ScotCS 39
Scotland
Appealed to – C R Smith Glaziers (Dunfermline) Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 20-Feb-2003
The taxpayer sold double glazing, supported by an insured guarantee, for which a charge was made. The additional charge was exempt, but it was contended that the contract should have stated the amount pursuant to Note 5.
Held: The contract . .
Appeal from – C R Smith Glaziers (Dunfermline) Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 20-Feb-2003
The taxpayer sold double glazing, supported by an insured guarantee, for which a charge was made. The additional charge was exempt, but it was contended that the contract should have stated the amount pursuant to Note 5.
Held: The contract . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.169095
VAT – Input tax – Claim for recovery of input tax under-claimed between 1974 and 1997 – Quantification and substantiation of claim – Whether the First-tier Tribunal erred in refusing appeal because amount not quantifiable with sufficient precision – No – Finance Act 2008, section 121 – appeal refused.
[2018] UKUT 218 (TCC), [2018] BVC 515, [2018] STC 1745
England and Wales
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.628082
VAT – Zero-rating – group 6 schedule 8 VATA 1994 – listed building construction of a garage – whether eligible for zero-rating – yes – appeal allowed
[2014] UKFTT 245 (TC)
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.525291
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 17(6) and (7) – Right to deduct input VAT – Exclusions provided for under national laws at the date of entry into force of the directive – Exclusions for cyclical economic reasons – Consultation of the Advisory Committee on value added tax.
C-409/99, [2002] EUECJ C-409/99
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167379
The Commissioners appealed an order reinstating the registration of the respondents for VAT. The respondents made largely exempt supplies. They were members of a group of companies, each trading similarly. They had sought an alteration from group registration to individual registrations. Such registrations were voluntary because their vatable turnover would be below the limits. The Directive recognised the difficulties created by smaller companies, and allowed national schemes to deal with this. Nevertheless there was no obligation to make such arrangements, and the companies could not complain of the lack of such arrangements. The cancellations of registrations stood.
Justice Lloyd
[2001] EWHC Ch 456
Sixth VAT Directive 77/388/EEC Art 24, Value Added Tax Act 1994 Schedule 1 paragraph 9
England and Wales
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167094
The law under which the Commissioners of Customs and Excise VAT search warrants are exercised is valid.
Times 12-Jun-1997
England and Wales
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88419
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Articles 17(2)(a) and 18(1)(a) of the Sixth VAT Directive – National legislation allowing an employer to deduct, as input tax, a certain percentage of an allowance paid to an employee for business use of a private vehicle.
The court referred to the objectives of the VAT Directive as including ‘fiscal neutrality and the avoidance of double taxation’.
C-338/98, [2001] EUECJ C-338/98
European
Cited – Harvey, Regina v SC 16-Dec-2015
Police had discovered quantities of stolen goods at the appellant’s business premises. He was convicted of receiving stolen goods, and confiscation order made. He now appealed from the inclusion in that order of sums of VAT which had already been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166862
ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Articles 17 and 18 of the Sixth VAT Directive – Issue of Government bonds to refund excess VAT – Category of taxable persons whose tax position is in credit
C-78/00, [2001] EUECJ C-78/00, [2003] BVC 311, [2003] BTC 5255, ECLI:EU:C:2001:579, [2001] ECR I-8195
European
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166767
A potential lessee who did not have an interest in immovable property agreed to take a lease in return for money paid by the landlord. The transaction was not exempt from value-added tax under article 13(B)(b) as ‘the leasing or letting of immovable property.’ Nor did a person taking an assignment of a lease of the property for consideration paid by the lessee to him have an interest in immovable property at the time of the agreement, and his case did not fall within article either. In each case the agreement was a supply of services either to the Landlord or to the Assignor. ‘The principle of the neutrality of VAT does not mean that a taxable person with a choice between two transactions may choose one of them and avail himself of the effects of the other’. And ‘The court observes in that connection [the VAT system’s objective of ensuring legal certainty] that, to facilitate the application of VAT, it is necessary to have regard, save in exceptional cases, to the objective character of the transaction in question’.
F. Macken, President of Chamber and Judges N. Colneric, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet and R. Schintgen Advocate-General A. Tizzano
Times 07-Nov-2001, C-409/98, C-108/99, [2002] QB 546, [2001] STC 1453, [2001] EUECJ C-108/99, [2001] EUECJ C-409/98
Community Sixth VAT Directive 13(B)(b)
European
Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Cantor Fitzgerald International Admn 29-Jun-1998
. .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Sinclair Collis Limited HL 7-Jun-2001
The appellants operated a system of placing their vending machines in clubs for the sale of cigarettes. They took as consideration a share of the profits of the cigarettes sold, and, in return, maintained the machines. They claimed that the machines . .
Cited – Sinclair Collis Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 12-Jun-2003
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13B(b) – Exempt transactions – Letting of immovable property – Meaning – Cigarette vending machines installed in commercial premises.
The claimants installed cigarette . .
Appealed to – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Cantor Fitzgerald International Admn 29-Jun-1998
. .
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 11-Aug-2004
When offering courses to distance learning students, the College offered materials for the courses. As part of the course this supply would be exempt, as books, the supply would be zero-rated, but the taxpayer would be able to reclaim its VAT . .
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 – Clarence House Ltd v National Westminster Bank Plc CA 8-Dec-2009
The defendant tenants, anticipating that the landlord might delay or refuse consent to a subletting entered into a ‘virtual assignment’ of the lease, an assignment in everything but the deed and with no registration. The lease contained a standard . .
Cited – Pendragon Plc and Others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 23-Jul-2013
The Revenue had imposed a penalty on the appellants saying that their arrangement for the sale and VAT taxation of demonstrator cars was, in European law terms. The taxpayer sought re-instatment of the First Tier Tribunal judgment in its favour.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166658
The taxpayer took in cars in part exchange at a cost higher than the re-sale value. The Commissioners sought to collect VAT on the higher price as shown in the agreements, and the tax payer on the actual value.
Held: Where the parties attributed a value to a car in a commercial agreement for commercial reasons, it was not open to the court to substitute its own judgment, and treat the extra value as a discount on the new car.
Arden J
Times 17-Oct-2000, Gazette 07-Sep-2000, [2000] STC 697
England and Wales
Appeal from – Lex Services plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise; Customs and Excise Commissioners v Littlewoods Organisation Plc CA 26-Oct-2001
The taxpayer took cars in part exchange on the sale of new cars. If the car was returned, the real value of the part exchange car was refunded. The taxpayer sought to be taxed on the real value of the car.
Held: The tax was payable on the . .
At first instance – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.83055
The appellants operated a system of placing their vending machines in clubs for the sale of cigarettes. They took as consideration a share of the profits of the cigarettes sold, and, in return, maintained the machines. They claimed that the machines were not placed pursuant to a licence to occupy land, a licence of immovable property, and were so not exempt from VAT, and input tax was reclaimable.
Held: Letting in VAT law is wider than in the general law. The court could go behind the words of the contract to its substance and reality. The transaction had to be seen as one transaction. Exemptions are to be applied restrictively. The Mirror case suggested that the occupation of land must be the predominant element. The case raised questions of interpretation of European law and was to be referred to the European Court of Justice.
Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett, Lord Scott of Foscote
[2001] UKHL 30, [2001] STC 989, [2001] All ER(D) 29
Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) 13(B)(b), Value Added Tax Act 1994
England and Wales
Cited – British Airports Authority v Customs and Excise Commissioners 1977
The court adopted the test when interpreting the contract at issue of whether the substance and reality of the agreement was the grant of a license to occupy land. . .
Cited – Lubbock Fine v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 15-Dec-1993
Europa The term ‘letting of immovable property’ used in Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Directive (77/388) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes to define a transaction . .
Cited – Mirror Group plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise, Cantor Fitzgerald International v Same ECJ 9-Oct-2001
A potential lessee who did not have an interest in immovable property agreed to take a lease in return for money paid by the landlord. The transaction was not exempt from value-added tax under article 13(B)(b) as ‘the leasing or letting of immovable . .
Reference to – Sinclair Collis Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 12-Jun-2003
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13B(b) – Exempt transactions – Letting of immovable property – Meaning – Cigarette vending machines installed in commercial premises.
The claimants installed cigarette . .
Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Sinclair Collis Limited CA 23-Jun-1999
The commissioners appealed against a decision that the agreements under which the respondents hired out vending displays to shops were for the occupation of land, and so were exempt from VAT.
Held: (a) the terms of the Directive are to be . .
Reference from – Sinclair Collis Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 12-Jun-2003
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13B(b) – Exempt transactions – Letting of immovable property – Meaning – Cigarette vending machines installed in commercial premises.
The claimants installed cigarette . .
Cited – Clear Channel United Kingdom Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 14-Oct-2004
The claimant sought a declaration that it had a tenancy for its occupation by an advertising station, and that it had protection under the 1954 Act. The defendant council said that only a licence had been granted.
Held: The grants included the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162833
The unincorporated association employed staff to provide services to its members. The cost was paid from subscriptions.
Held: The provision of these services was chargeable to VAT, and the subscriptions were accordingly liable to VAT. Provisions within the constitution that such services were supplied by the association as agent for the members, were insufficient to avoid the charge to VAT.
Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Hoffmann Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Scott of Foscote
Times 10-Apr-2001, Gazette 01-Jun-2001, [2001] UKHL 19, [2001] 1 WLR 794, [2001] BTC 5196, [2001] STC 606, [2001] STI 671, [2001] 2 All ER 597
Value Added Tax Act 1994 4(1) 94(2)(a)
England and Wales
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162834
A company made arrangements for finance for its customers to purchase products at an apparent zero rate of interest. In fact the finance company deducted an undisclosed commission before forwarding payment to the shop. The shop wanted to pay VAT only on the amount it received. It was held to be liable on the amount paid by the consumer. The taxable amount was the consideration, and the consideration was the amount paid by the customer. The deduction was by way of set off under a different, parallel contract. It was necessary to achieve parity between different kinds of transactions as seen by the purchaser. The determining factor is ‘the existence of an agreement between the parties for reciprocal performance, the payment received by the one, being the real and effective counter-value for the goods furnished to the other’.
Advocate General Alber
Times 08-Jun-2001, [2001] CEC 132, [2001] STC ECJ 803, [2001] EUECJ C-34/99, [2001] STC 803, [2001] BTC 5240, [2001] BVC 315, [2001] ECR I-3833, [2001] 1 WLR 1693, [2001] All ER (EC) 714, [2001] 2 CMLR 42, [2001] STI 835
Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC on the harmonisation of laws relating to turnover taxes
European
Reference from – Primback Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 30-Apr-1996
A retailer giving a discount was liable for Vat only on the discounted finance price, not on the full retail price. . .
At QBD – Primback Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners QBD 12-Sep-1994
An undisclosed discount for interest free credit given by a retailer was not allowable, and VAT was payable on the full amount. . .
Referred to – Primback Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 30-Apr-1996
A retailer giving a discount was liable for Vat only on the discounted finance price, not on the full retail price. . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v DFS Furniture Company Plc ChD 16-Apr-2003
The Commissioners had been ordered to repay VAT to the taxpayer. A subsequent decision of the ECJ meant that the sum should have been repaid to the Commissioners. The taxpayer now alleged that the commissioners were out of the two year maximum time . .
Cited – DFS Furniture Company Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 16-Mar-2004
The taxpayers said that the Commissioners’ assessment to VAT was out of time, and appealed a finding that it was not. They said that time should run from the point at which the Commissioners knew the facts upon which the assessment was based. The . .
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 – Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 11-May-2016
The court was asked whether the appellant, Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd (formerly MyTravel Group plc), was entitled to recover, by way of input tax VAT charged by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP in respect of services provided by PwC and paid for by . .
Cited – Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 11-May-2016
The court was asked whether the appellant, Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd (formerly MyTravel Group plc), was entitled to recover, by way of input tax VAT charged by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP in respect of services provided by PwC and paid for by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162741
ECJ Articles 9(1), 10(1) and 20(2) to (6) of Regulation No 2730/79 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, in the version resulting from Regulation No 568/85, must be interpreted as meaning that a Community exporter can forfeit his right to payment of a non-differentiated export refund if (a) the product in respect of which the export refund was paid, and which is sold to a purchaser established in a non-member country, is, immediately after its release for home use in that non-member country, transported back to the Community under the external Community transit procedure and is there released for home use on payment of import duties, without any infringement being established and (b) that operation constitutes an abuse on the part of that Community exporter. A finding that there is an abuse presupposes an intention on the part of the Community exporter to benefit from an advantage as a result of the application of the Community rules by artificially creating the conditions for obtaining it. Evidence of this must be placed before the national court in accordance with the rules of national law, for instance by establishing that there was collusion between that exporter and the importer of the goods into the non-member country. The fact that, before being re-imported into the Community, the product was sold by the purchaser established in the non-member country concerned to an undertaking also established in that country with which he has personal and commercial links is one of the facts which can be taken into account by the national court when ascertaining whether the conditions giving rise to an obligation to repay refunds are fulfilled.
The exporter was refused a rebate of duty to which he was entitled on the face of the relevant Commission Regulation upon the export of his goods, because he had abused the law by claiming it in respect of goods which had been exported to a third country only to be at once re-imported into the country of origin. The court held at para 59 that:
‘a finding that there has been an abuse presupposes an intention on the part of the Community exporter to benefit from an advantage as a result of the application of the Community rules by artificially creating the conditions for obtaining it.’
The essential reason why the trading scheme failed was that the choice of a circular supply route did not involve a choice between different methods of achieving the trader’s commercial purpose. It had no commercial purpose other than the avoidance of tax.
G.C. Rodriguez Iglesias, P
C-110/99, [2000] ECR I-11569, [2000] EUECJ C-110/99
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 . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Pendragon Plc and Others SC 10-Jun-2015
‘This appeal is about an elaborate scheme designed and marketed by KPMG relating to demonstrator cars used by retail distributors for test drives and other internal purposes. In the ordinary course, a car distributor will buy new cars for use as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162629
A cafe owner rented a table out to a drug dealer. He was charged VAT on the rent, but denied liability on the basis that it was an illegal activity and not taxable. However the renting itself was not unlawful either under national Netherlands law or International law. It was held that VAT was payable.
Times 08-Jul-1999, C-158/98, [1999] STC 742, [1999] EUECJ C-158/98
European
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162375
Failure to fulfil obligations – Article 4(5) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Access to roads on payment of a toll – Failure to levy VAT.
C-408/97, [2000] EUECJ C-408/97
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162278
The Administrative Court does not have and should not assume jurisdiction to carry out a review of a disputed claim for a repayment of input tax.
[2002] EWHC 2134
England and Wales
Cited – UK Tradecorp Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioners for Customs and Excise Admn 10-Nov-2004
The trader had traded in zero-rated goods, leading to a net reclaim of input tax. Having submitted a claim, it sought repayment, and interest on the sums withheld.
Held: No duty fell upon the commissioners until they had accepted the claim to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.220136
For the purposes of Value Added Tax, the terms ‘Establishments’ and ‘organisations’ did not only refer to legal entities as such, but included natural persons, and in this case, particularly, partnerships. Accordingly a partnership running a nursing home was not excluded from exemption from registration under the legislation, and so could not register for VAT.
Times 19-Oct-1999, C-216/97, [1999] STC 934, [1999] EUECJ C-216/97
European
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.162143
ECJ Act of accession of the Kingdom of Sweden – Sixth VAT Directive – Transitional provisions – Exemptions – Services provided by authors, artists and performers – Lack of jurisdiction of the Court
C-134/97, [1998] EUECJ C-134/97
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.162092
ECJ Judgment – Sixth VAT Directive – Car-leasing services – Fixed establishment – Rules governing reimbursement of VAT to taxable persons not established in the territory of the State – Principle of non-discrimination
C-390/96, [1998] EUECJ C-390/96, [1998] ECR I-2553
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161999
ECJ (Judgment) VAT was payable on supplies of counterfeit drugs even though the income generated by the trade was unlawful. Fiscal neutrality prevented differentiation between lawful and unlawful supplies
The defendants had sold counterfeit perfumes and had had VAT charges imposed retrospectively. It was held proper to charge VAT on sales which were illegal. Fiscal neutrality was set aside only where the special characteristic of a product required it
Times 10-Jun-1998, Gazette 09-Sep-1998, C-3/97, [1998] EUECJ C-3/97
Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC May 1977 2
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.162023
‘Items’ described as gifts’ which Kuwait Petroleum exchanged under a petrol promotion scheme for vouchers received by customers purchasing petrol were issued ‘free of charge’. The purchase of petrol and the exchange of vouchers for gifts were separate transactions, and the petrol was sold and invoiced for the price paid, there being nothing to suggest that the price contained a component representing the value of the vouchers or of the redemption goods.
Held: Where goods were supplied as part of sales promotion free to purchasers of petrol, but remained of substantial value, they were chargeable supplies and liable to VAT in the sellers hands. Fennelly: ‘I cannot pretend that it is easy to extract from the case law a completely coherent set of rules which it is possible to apply with total confidence to every promotion scheme devised by the ingenuity of commerce’. However: ‘Goods are supplied ‘for consideration’ within the meaning of art 2(1) of the Sixth Directive only if there is a reciprocal relationship between the supplier and the purchaser entailing reciprocal performance, the price received by the supplier constituting the value actually given in return for the goods supplied . . . ‘
Advocate General Fennelly
Times 14-May-1999, C-48/97, [1999] STC 488, [1999] EUECJ C-48/97
European
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
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 – Church of England Children’s Society v Revenue and Customs ChD 29-Jul-2005
The Society sent out free newsletters to its unpaid fund-raisers and supporters. They sought to deduct input tax charged to them from the supplies associated with the costs.
Held: The Society might be able to deduct such tax as residual input . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.162045
The court considered the criteria for determining whether the provision to guests by a hotelier of travel services (and in particular transport to and from the hotel and excursions) constituted supply which was ancillary to the supply of accommodation.
Held: The provision applied not just to travel agents, but to all ‘traders who habitually arrange travel or tours and, in order to supply the services generally associated with activities of that kind, have recourse to other taxable persons’ ‘traders such as hoteliers who provide services habitually associated with travel frequently make use of services bought in from third parties which take up a small proportion of the package price compared to the accommodation and are among the tasks traditionally entrusted to such traders. Those bought-in services do not therefore constitute for customers an aim in itself, but a means of better enjoying the principal service supplied by the trader. In such circumstances the services bought in from third parties remain purely ancillary in relation to the in-house services, and the trader should not be taxed under art 26 of the Sixth Directive. Where, however, a hotelier habitually offers his customers, in addition to accommodation, services which go beyond the tasks traditionally entrusted to hoteliers, and which cannot be carried out without a substantial effect on the package price charged, such as travel to the hotel from distant pick-up points, such services are not to be equated with purely ancillary services.’
C-308/96, [1998] STC 1189, [1998] EUECJ C-308/96
European
Reference from – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Madgett and Another T/A Howden Court Hotel QBD 15-Jan-1996
A hotel’s offering of a coach trip to collect guests may make them travel agents for VAT purposes. The case was referred on to the ECJ. . .
Reffered to – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Madgett and Another T/A Howden Court Hotel QBD 15-Jan-1996
A hotel’s offering of a coach trip to collect guests may make them travel agents for VAT purposes. The case was referred on to the ECJ. . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v British Telecommunications Plc HL 11-Feb-1999
The cost of the delivery of a quantity of new cars from the factory or depot to the purchaser is incidental and ancillary to the supply of the cars themselves, and the VAT on delivery charges was not reclaimable by the purchasing company as Input . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 13-Nov-2003
The college appealed a finding that the supply of course manuals to its students was part of its exempt rather than zero-rated supply.
Held: ‘Once it is decided that there is a single supply from an economic view which should not be . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 11-Aug-2004
When offering courses to distance learning students, the College offered materials for the courses. As part of the course this supply would be exempt, as books, the supply would be zero-rated, but the taxpayer would be able to reclaim its VAT . .
Cited – Card Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 25-Feb-1999
A company procuring insurance purchases for credit card protection was as exempt from VAT as was the insurer. A provision which restricted the ability to claim such exemption to those registered as insurers under national was invalid under European . .
Cited – Beynon and Partners v Customs and Excise HL 25-Nov-2004
The House asked whether the personal administration of a drug such as a vaccine by an NHS doctor to a patient is a taxable supply for the purposes of value added tax. The provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Customs and Excise HL 20-Oct-2005
The college supplied educational services by distance learning. The commissioner sought to argue that printe daterials supplied with the course were ancillary and did not have the same exemption form VAT.
Held: The supplies did benefit from . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Secret Hotels2 Ltd SC 5-Mar-2014
The Court was asked as to: ‘the liability for Value Added Tax of a company which markets and arranges holiday accommodation through an on-line website. The outcome turns on the appropriate characterisation of the relationship between the company, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161948
A company procuring insurance purchases for credit card protection was as exempt from VAT as was the insurer. A provision which restricted the ability to claim such exemption to those registered as insurers under national was invalid under European Law: ‘it is for the national court to determine . . whether the transactions . . are to be regarded for VAT purposes as comprising two independent supplies . . or whether one of those two supplies is the principal supply to which the other is ancillary, so that it receives the same tax treatment as the principal supply.’ What matters is ‘the essential features of the transaction’. ‘There is a single supply in particular in cases where one or more elements are to be regarded as constituting the principal service, whilst one or more elements are to be regarded, by contrast, as ancillary services which share the tax treatment of the principal service. A service must be regarded as ancillary to a principal service if it does not constitute for customers an aim in itself, but a means of better enjoying the principal service supplied . .’
As to what amounted to insurance, the court said: ‘the essentials of an insurance transaction are, as generally understood, that the insurer undertakes, in return for prior payment of a premium, to provide the insured, in the event of materialisation of the risk covered, with the service agreed when the contract was concluded.
It is not essential that the service the insurer has undertaken to provide in the event of loss consists in the payment of a sum of money, as that service may also take the form of the provision of assistance in cash or in kind of the type listed in the annex Directive 73/239 as amended by Directive 84/641. There is no reason for the interpretation of the term ‘insurance’ to differ according to whether it appears in the Directive on insurance or in the Sixth Directive.’
Times 18-Mar-1999, C-349/96, [1999] STC 270, [1999] 2 AC 601, [1998] EUECJ C-349/96 – O
Referred back – Card Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 6-Feb-2001
The appellants sold a system protecting credit card holders against the consequences of loss or theft. They claimed that it was insurance and exempt from VAT. The commissioners said it was a service and vatable. The card provided a range of services . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Madgett and Baldwin (trading as Howden Court Hotel) ECJ 22-Oct-1998
The court considered the criteria for determining whether the provision to guests by a hotelier of travel services (and in particular transport to and from the hotel and excursions) constituted supply which was ancillary to the supply of . .
Cited – Faaborg-Gelting Linien v Finanzamt Flensburg ECJ 2-May-1996
A non-takeaway restaurant is a supply of services, and a ferry supply was made from its place of business. The supply of prepared food and drink at a restaurant resulted from a whole series of services (including the preparation and service of the . .
Referred back – Card Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 6-Feb-2001
The appellants sold a system protecting credit card holders against the consequences of loss or theft. They claimed that it was insurance and exempt from VAT. The commissioners said it was a service and vatable. The card provided a range of services . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Century Life Plc CA 19-Dec-2000
The Directive required member states to exempt from VAT, services involving the provision of insurance, and for intermediaries. Following the Regulator’s involvement, the principal company had to arrange for the checking of existing policies, and . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 13-Nov-2003
The college appealed a finding that the supply of course manuals to its students was part of its exempt rather than zero-rated supply.
Held: ‘Once it is decided that there is a single supply from an economic view which should not be . .
Cited – Commissioners for Customs and Excise v Southern Primary Housing Limited CA 18-Nov-2003
The land owner had elected to pay VAT on the purchase of land. It sought to recover that VAT. The Commissioners appealed an order allowing that.
Held: Ther were three transactions, the purchase, the sale, and a development contract. The input . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 11-Aug-2004
When offering courses to distance learning students, the College offered materials for the courses. As part of the course this supply would be exempt, as books, the supply would be zero-rated, but the taxpayer would be able to reclaim its VAT . .
Cited – Beynon and Partners v Customs and Excise HL 25-Nov-2004
The House asked whether the personal administration of a drug such as a vaccine by an NHS doctor to a patient is a taxable supply for the purposes of value added tax. The provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical . .
Cited – HM Revenue and Customs v Weight Watchers (UK) Ltd ChD 21-Jan-2008
The court was asked whether the weight-watchers program which included attendance at a course and a supply of supporting materials was one single standard-rated supply or separate supplies of zero-rated printed materials and standard-rated support . .
Cited – Re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and Others ChD 31-Jan-2011
The Financial Services Authority sought public interest orders for the winding up of three companies selling, it said, extended warranty cover plans without authorisation. The companies said that authorisation was not required, since only services . .
Cited – Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd v The Financial Services Authority CA 29-Nov-2011
Parties appealed against on order for the winding up of the company. The Authority (FSA) had said that the company which supplied warranties to owners of digital receiver boxes were providing regulated insurance services, but that the companies were . .
Cited – Baxendale Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 4-Jul-2013
FTTTx PROCEDURE – striking out of proceedings – whether appellants’ case had a reasonable prospect of succeeding – abuse of process – whether Court of Appeal decision in David Baxendale was per incuriam or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161975
An arbitrator’s services are not those of a lawyer for the purposes of determining the place of supply of service for VAT purposes.
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Interpretation of Article 9(2)(e), third indent – Services of an arbitrator – Place where services are supplied.
Times 10-Nov-1997, C-145/96, [1997] EUECJ C-145/96, [1997] All ER (EC) 85, [1998] 1 CMLR 99
Cited – Jivraj v Hashwani (Rev 2) CA 22-Jun-2010
The court was asked whether parties to an arbitration agreement in a commercial contract can stipulate that the tribunal is to be drawn from members of a particular religious group, in this case the Ismaili community.
Held: The defendant’s . .
Cited – Jivraj v Hashwani SC 27-Jul-2011
The parties had a joint venture agreement which provided that any dispute was to be referred to an arbitrator from the Ismaili community. The claimant said that this method of appointment became void as a discriminatory provision under the 2003 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161850
(Judgment) The special measures for derogation which the Member States may introduce, pursuant to Article 27 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, in order to prevent tax evasion or avoidance must be strictly interpreted and may not derogate from the basis for charging value added tax laid down in Article 11 of the Sixth Directive except within the limits strictly necessary for achieving that aim.
Consequently, despite an authorization given by the Council to the Member State concerned pursuant to Article 27, national rules which, in the case of supplies for consideration made between associated persons, in particular as regards rental of property, take as the minimum basis of assessment the full cost of the services supplied, as defined in Article 11A(1)(c) of the Directive, although the agreed consideration, while less than the minimum basis of assessment, represents the market rate, are not covered by Article 27 of the Directive.
C-63/96, [1997] EUECJ C-63/96
European
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161797
Vat and Customs Duty – Inward Processing Relief
[2018] UKUT 302 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628096
VALUE ADDED TAX –application to admit new evidence in relation to ‘best judgment’ assessment to VAT-application allowed – influence of new evidence on findings as to quantum of assessment- appeal allowed
[2018] UKUT 255 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628091
VALUE ADDED TAX – ‘missing trader’ fraud – whether HMRC made an ‘assessment’- whether HMRC’s case adequately pleaded and put to witnesses – nature of appeal against FTT’s factual findings – appeal dismissed
[2018] UKUT 363 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628105
VAT – sporting exemption – whether First-tier Tribunal made errors of law in concluding that taxpayer a non-profit making body for the purposes of the exemption-no- Group 10 Schedule 9 VATA 1992 Item 3 – appeal dismissed
[2018] UKUT 308 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628102
VAT – Exemption – Education – arts 132-134 PVD 2006/112/EC; Group 6 sch 9 VATA 1994 – Sales from student union campus shops – eligible body – closely related supplies – appeal dismissed
[2018] UKUT 343 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628101
VALUE ADDED TAX – reduced rate – energy saving materials supplied as part of a single composite supply – whether the whole of the supply subject to the standard rate of VAT or whether a component of the supply subject to a reduced rate of VAT – appeal dismissed
[2018] UKUT 292 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628094
VAT – place of supply – whether the place of supply by appellant of vehicles purchased by appellant from other Member States of the EU was in the UK or outside the UK – whether intra-Community transport ascribed to appellant’s supply – no – held, place of acquisition and supply by appellant was in the UK – Principal VAT Directive, arts 31, 32 and 40 – EMAG, Euro Tyre and VSTR (CJEU) – VATA 1994, s 7(2), (7) and 13(3)
[2018] UKUT 203 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628070
[2018] UKUT 222 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628085
VAT – repayment of VAT to non-EU trader under Thirteenth Directive – whether supplies used for taxable transactions – whether acting as a taxable person – consideration of Sveda and Iberdrola
[2018] UKUT 214 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628079
VAT – whether affiliation fees paid by golf clubs to golf associations standard-rated or exempt by virtue of Value Added Tax Act 1994 Schedule 9 Group 10 Item 3 – whether exemption applied to supplies to profit-making bodies – whether supplies relating to standardised handicaps essential to sport
[2018] UKUT 191 (TCC), [2018] STC 1539, [2018] BVC 513
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628066
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – claim for repayment of overpaid output tax – VATA s 80 – VAT Regs reg 37 – whether claim can be amended by complete substitution of reasons – no – claim must remain substantially unchanged – appeal allowed
[2016] UKUT 89 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.562427
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – repayment claims – VATA s 80, VAT Regs reg 37 – whether intimation of claim without particulars satisfies statutory requirements – no – whether claim must be allocated to prescribed accounting periods – yes – no claim within statutory meaning made
[2016] UKUT 90 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.562425
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX: default penalty surcharge; payments on account regime; effect of increase in threshold; meaning of ‘basic period’ in art 2 of payments on account order; whether non-availability of 7 days additional time to pay breaches EU principle of equal treatment; reasonable excuse for material default
[2016] UKUT 88 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.562421
Costs decision
[2016] UKUT 237 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.567339
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax -whether Appellant carrying on economic activity – UK management company providing management services to overseas subsidiaries – no agreement on amount of consideration to be paid by subsidiaries – whether taxable supplies made – no – appeal dismissed
[2016] UKUT 69 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.562422
Value Added Tax – (1) Recoverable output tax – Fleming rule/ Section 121 FA 2008 – Principles of quantification- (2) Whether original claim susceptible of amendment – No; – Appeal allowed in part
[2014] UKFTT 242 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.525286
VAT – application to strike out – no appealable issue – appeal struck out
[2014] UKFTT 289 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.525292
UTTC VAT – missing trader intra-community (MTIC) fraud – extent of challenge by appellant to HMRC’s case before the First-tier Tribunal (‘FTT’) – whether certain evidence was properly admitted by the FTT – whether there was sufficient evidence to support the FTT’s finding that the appellant should have known that its transactions were connected to fraudulent evasion of VAT – held, there was – appeal dismissed
[2013] UKUT 432 (TCC), [2014] STC 520, [2013] STI 3056, [2013] BVC 1802
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.521014
VAT – input tax – absence of valid invoices – refusal by HMRC to allow input tax claims – absence of reconsideration – whether original decision reasonable – finding by FTT that unreasonable – conclusion by FTT that decision would have been the same had HMRC acted reasonably – nature of jurisdiction – whether FTT’s finding that supplies were made in relevant transactions was perverse – unclear what matters taken into account in arriving at that finding – appeal remitted to FTT to make appropriate findings.
Wallace, Clark TJJ
[2011] UKUT 497 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.462890
UTCC INPUT TAX – MTIC fraud – whether agent’s knowledge attributed to company – yes-appeal allowed
Greener Solutions sought repayment of the input tax incurred in respect of mobile telephones it had bought and then exported. The individual who had effected all the relevant transactions on behalf of GSL was Oliver Murray. Murray knew of the fraud committed by Jag-Tec, the missing trader. The question was whether his knowledge should be imputed to GSL.
Held: It should be because Murray had effectively implemented the fraud on behalf of GSL but the fraud was not aimed at GSL.
Warren J P
[2012] UKUT 18 (TCC), [2012] STC 1056
England and Wales
Appeal from – Greener Solutions Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 26-Aug-2010
FTTTx INPUT TAX – MTIC fraud – whether agent’s knowledge attributed to company – no – whether company should have known of connection to fraud – no – appeal allowed . .
Cited – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others CA 31-Jul-2013
Defendants appealed against refusal of their request for a summary striking out for lack of jurisdiction, of the claims against them arising from their management of the insolvency of the first defendant. . .
Cited – Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others ChD 30-Jul-2012
The company was said to have engaged in a fraud based on false European Trading Scheme Allowances, and had been wound up by the Revenue. The liquidators, in the company name, now sought recovery from former directors and associates.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.452885
UTTC CUSTOMS DUTIES – post-clearance demand – goods imported using simplified inward processing relief system – appellant acting as importer’s, or purported importer’s, agent – import declarations submitted by appellant incorrect by reason of importer providing false identity- no bills of discharge provided – Customs Code arts 5, 204 – whether appellant liable for payment of duty and VAT – yes – appeal dismissed
Bishopp J
[2012] UKUT 49 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.452893
Whether VAT assessments were issued within time limit.
Mann J
[2012] UKUT 105 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.460108
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – option to tax land – whether option survived partnership changes – whether one partnership or two – First-tier Tribunal apparently decided only one – whether tribunal’s findings of fact supported by evidence – unclear – appeal remitted to First-tier Tribunal for re-hearing
[2012] UKUT 111 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.460109
UTTC INPUT TAX – Capital goods scheme – Adjustment – Decrease in use of capital item in making taxable supplies – College makes educational supplies – College incurred capital expenditure on building extension to premises – College leased premises to tenant company – Opted to tax premises – College took lease back from tenant company – After initial period tenant company struck off register and lease became bona vacantia – No rent paid after initial period – Whether adjustment to relief for input tax required by change of use – Appeal dismissed – VAT Act 1994 s24(1) and reg 115(2) of Gen Regs
[2011] UKUT 131 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.440817
[2011] UKUT 399 (TCC), [2011] STC 2342, [2011] BVC 1730, [2011] STI 3042
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.448060
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax repayment claim – MTIC fraud – contra-traders – whether Appellant knew or should have known that its transactions were connected with fraud.
Newey J
[2011] UKUT 259 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.441766
ECJ The derogation provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 11C(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 does not authorize a Member State which enacts provisions for the refund of VAT in the case of total or partial non-payment of the consideration to refuse that refund where the unpaid consideration is in kind, when it permits a refund where the consideration is expressed in money.
On the one hand, since such provisions alter the taxable amount in a manner which goes beyond what is strictly necessary in order to avoid the risk of tax evasion, they cannot be justified by the aim of preventing such a risk. On the other hand, those provisions lead to discrimination against transactions in which consideration is paid in kind as compared with those in which the consideration is expressed in money, by discouraging traders from entering into barter contracts, when the two situations, which are economically and commercially speaking identical, are treated in the same way by the Sixth Directive.
C-330/95, [1997] EUECJ C-330/95, [1997] ECR I-3801
European
Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 28-Jul-2005
The claimant had sought repayment of overpaid VAT, and the respondent resisted arguing that this would be an unjust enrichment. A reference to the European Court was sought.
Held: It was not possible to say that the House’s opinion was acte . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161703
ECJ Article 13.B(b)(1) of Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes may be construed as meaning that the provision of short-term accommodation for guests is taxable, as constituting the provision of accommodation in sectors with a function similar to that of the hotel sector. In that regard, Article 13.B(b)(1) does not preclude taxation in respect of letting agreements concluded for a period of less than six months, if that duration is deemed to reflect the parties’ intention. It is, however, for the national court to determine whether, in a case before it, certain factors (such as the automatic renewal of the letting agreement) suggest that the duration stated in the letting agreement does not reflect the parties’ true intention, in which case the actual total duration of the accommodation, rather than that specified in the letting agreement, would have to be taken into consideration. A distinction drawn by Member States, who enjoy a margin of discretion in this regard, between accommodation in the hotel sector and the letting of dwelling accommodation on the basis of its duration constitutes an appropriate criterion of distinction, since one of the ways in which hotel accommodation specifically differs from the letting of dwelling accommodation is the duration of the stay, and the use to this end of the criterion of the provision of short-term accommodation, being defined as less than six months, appears to be a reasonable means by which to ensure that the transactions of taxable persons whose business is similar to the essential function performed by a hotel, namely the provision of temporary accommodation on a commercial basis, are subject to tax.
C-346/95, [1998] ECR 1-481, [1998] EUECJ C-346/95
Cited – Colaingrove Limited v The Commissioners for Customs and Excise ChD 16-Apr-2003
The Directive exempted from a charge to VAT for letting of imoveable property. The taxpayer challenged the requirement to charge to VAT his business of leasing pitches for caravans.
Held: The directive allowed member states to derogate from . .
Cited – Colaingrove Ltd v the Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 19-Feb-2004
The taxpayer licensed static caravans on seasonal pitches on its land. They claimed exemption from charging VAT on the basis that they were residential lettings exempt under European legislation.
Held: The appeal failed. The legislation . .
Cited – Belgian State v Temco Europe ECJ 18-Nov-2004
Where the substance of a transaction was merely that premises were made available under a licence for occupation, rather than for the provision of services, a licence to occupy premises could be treated as a letting for the purpose of the Sixth . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161713
ECJ (Judgment) Tax provisions – Harmonization of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Taxable persons – Bodies governed by public law – Activities in the exercise of public authority not taxable – Definition – Option for Member States to include activities exempted by virtue of Article 13 of the Sixth Directive, irrespective of the manner of their performance
(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 4(5), fourth subpara.)
The fourth subparagraph of Article 4(5) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes must be interpreted as permitting Member States to consider that the activities listed in Article 13 of the directive are carried out by bodies governed by publi
C-247/95, [1997] EUECJ C-247/95
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161639
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Leasing company supplying passenger cars – Place where the supplier has established its business – Fixed establishment
[1997] BVC 547, [1997] ECR I-4383, [1997] BTC 5433, C-190/95, [1997] EUECJ C-190/95, [1997] CEC 1082, [1997] STC 1272
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161613
ECJ (Judgment) The first indent of Article 9(2)(c) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes which, under the special scheme for services supplied between taxable persons where the cost of the services is included in the price of the goods, lays down that the place where services relating to certain activities, including cultural and artistic activities and, where relevant, services ancillary thereto, are supplied is the place where those services are physically carried out, must be interpreted as covering the activity of a person who provides sound-engineering for artistic or entertainment events by choosing and operating the equipment used, adjusting it to the particular acoustic conditions and the desired sound effects, and who supplies the requisite equipment and operating staff, where the service which he provides constitutes a prerequisite for the performance of the principal artistic or entertainment service supplied. The fact that the person concerned has undertaken in addition to coordinate the sound effects to be produced with his assistance with certain visual effects produced by other persons cannot affect this interpretation of that provision.
The intention of the Community legislature was that where artistic or entertainment services are supplied in a Member State and the organizer of the event charges the final consumer tax in the same State, that tax – its assessment basis being all those services the cost of which is included in the price of the complete service paid for by the final consumer – must be paid to that State and not to the various Member States in which the various intermediate suppliers of services have established their businesses.
C-327/94, [1996] EUECJ C-327/94, [1996] ECR I-4595
Sixth Directive 77/388 9(2)(c)
European
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161480
(Judgment) The specific connection rule for transport services laid down in Article 9(2)(b) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes is intended to ensure that each Member State taxes transport services as regards the parts of the journey carried out in its territory. Accordingly, a Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under that provision and Article 2 of the directive where it exempts from value added tax sea voyages in vessels flying the national flag which do not put in at a foreign port as regards the part of the journey within its territorial waters. The defaulting Member State cannot justify its failure in that respect by relying on the practical difficulties confronting it, on the fact that the taxable amounts in question would be negligible, on the absence of the definitive rules for charging VAT on passenger transport provided for in Article 28(5) of the Sixth Directive or on the exemption applying to international maritime transport and trips organized by undertakings from non-member count
[1996] EUECJ C-331/94
European
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161481
ECJ Scope of directive – Right to deduction of VAT – Retention of balance of VAT due – Principle of proportionality.
C-286/94, [1997] EUECJ C-286/94, [1998] STC 126
Cited – UK Tradecorp Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioners for Customs and Excise Admn 10-Nov-2004
The trader had traded in zero-rated goods, leading to a net reclaim of input tax. Having submitted a claim, it sought repayment, and interest on the sums withheld.
Held: No duty fell upon the commissioners until they had accepted the claim to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161450
ECJ By including, by means of Article 1 of Regulation No 1641/94, in residues from the manufacture of starch from maize within the meaning of tariff subheading 2303 10, residues resulting from the screening of maize used in the wet process in a proportion not exceeding 15% by weight and residues of steep-water used in the manufacture of alcohol or of other starch-derived products, the Commission has modified that subheading. It therefore exceeded its power to clarify the tariff heading which had been conferred on it by Article 9 of Regulation No 2658/87, with the result that the regulation is to that extent invalid. Residues from the manufacture of starch from maize include only products which result directly from the operation of extracting starch from maize and not products such as the residues resulting from the screening of maize which are already contained in bulk maize and do not undergo any change in the course of the starch extraction process and products such as residues of steep-water used in the manufacture of alcohol or of other starch-derived products which result from a separate process, subsequent to that of starch manufacture.
C-267/94, [1995] EUECJ C-267/94, [1995] ECR I-4845
Cited – Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd v Customs and Excise ChD 27-Jul-2005
The appellants had imported Playstation computer games. They appealed refusal of a rebate of 50 million euros paid in VAT before a reclassification of the equipment so as to make it exempt from VAT.
Held: ‘The effect of the annulment of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161436
ECJ Article 22(8) of the Sixth Directive (77/388) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, as amended by Directive 91/680 supplementing the common system of value added tax and amending Directive 77/388 with a view to the abolition of fiscal frontiers, must be interpreted as not precluding a national rule requiring accompanying documents to be drawn up in respect of goods transported within the confines of the Member State concerned.
The complete and exhaustive harmonization of the formalities which the Member States may impose on internal transactions for the correct collection of value added tax and for the prevention of evasion has not yet been carried out by the Community legislature and the latter, when laying down the rule that internal transactions and those between Member States should be treated equally, did not intend to prohibit a Member State from imposing formalities which are stricter on internal transactions than those applying to intra-Community trade.
C-217/94, [1996] EUECJ C-217/94
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161402
Europa Under the procedure for a preliminary ruling provided for in Article 177 of the Treaty it is for the national courts alone, before which the proceedings are pending and which must assume responsibility for the judgment to be given, to determine, having regard to the particular features of each case, both the need for a preliminary ruling to enable them to give judgment and the relevance of the questions which they refer to the Court of Justice. A request for a preliminary ruling from a national court may be rejected only if it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law or the examination of the validity of a rule of Community law sought by that court bears no relation to the actual nature of the case or the subject-matter of the main action. Furthermore, the Court has no jurisdiction, in those proceedings, to rule on the compatibility of a national measure with Community law.
Articles 2, 11 and 17 of the Sixth Directive (77/388) must be interpreted as precluding national rules which, without an authorization having been obtained under Article 27 of that directive, make the importation of finished petroleum products subject to value added tax (‘VAT’) calculated on the basis of a basic price different from that provided for in Article 11 and which, by exempting traders in the petroleum sector from the obligation to submit returns, deprive them of the right to deduct the tax charged directly on transactions relating to inputs. The fundamental principle which underlies the VAT system, and which follows from Article 2 of the First and Sixth Directives, is that VAT applies to each transaction by way of production or distribution after deduction has been made of the VAT which has been levied directly on transactions relating to inputs. Moreover, as regards the supply of goods, Article 11 of the Sixth Directive, since its aim is in particular to ensure that VAT is applied at each marketing stage on the price or value of the goods at that stage, precludes the application of taxation arrangements under which the tax is determined, once only, on the price at the first marketing stage. The right of deduction provided for in Article 17 et seq. of the Sixth Directive, which forms an integral part of the VAT scheme, cannot be limited in principle and must be exercised immediately in respect of all the taxes charged on transactions relating to inputs, affects the level of the tax burden and must be applied in a similar manner in all the Member States, so that derogations are permitted only in the cases expressly provided for in the directive. The provisions of Article 11A(1) and B(1) and (2) and Article 17(1) and (2), which specify the conditions giving rise to the right to deduct and the extent of that right and do not leave the Member States any discretion as regards their implementation, confer rights on individuals which they may invoke before a national court in order to challenge national rules which are incompatible with those provisions.
Europa The special measures derogating from the Sixth Directive, as provided for in Article 27 of that directive, do not accord with Community law unless they remain within the limits of the objectives referred to in Article 27(1) and have also been notified to the Commission and impliedly or expressly authorized by the Council in the circumstances specified in paragraphs (1) to (4) of Article 27. In order to satisfy those conditions, it is not sufficient for a Member State merely to send to the Commission the whole of a draft law on the application of value added tax without giving any particular indication regarding the special arrangements provided for. Only a notification referring expressly to Article 27(2) of the directive enables the Commission and, if necessary, the Council to verify whether the derogating arrangements in question are within the scope of the objectives referred to in Article 27(1).
The provisions of the Sixth Directive, in particular Articles 13 to 17 thereof, must be interpreted as precluding a general exemption from VAT on all services in respect of the transport and storage of imported petroleum products. Article 14(1)(i), in conjunction with Article 11B(3)(b), of the directive provides an exemption solely for the transport costs incurred up to the first place of destination and, optionally, the costs in respect of transport to another known place of destination, and the general exemption also deprives a trader of the right to deduct VAT charged on services in respect of transport and storage after transport of the petroleum products to a second place of destination.
The interpretation which, in the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred upon it by Article 177 of the Treaty, the Court of Justice gives to a rule of Community law clarifies and defines, where necessary, the meaning and scope of that rule as it must be or ought to have been understood and applied from the time of its coming into force. It follows that the rule as thus interpreted may, and must, be applied by the courts even to legal relationships arising and established before the delivery of the judgment ruling on the request for interpretation, provided that in other respects the conditions under which an action relating to the application of that rule may be brought before the courts having jurisdiction are satisfied.
It follows more particularly that the right to obtain a refund of amounts charged by a Member State in breach of rules of Community law is the consequence and complement of the rights conferred on individuals by the Community provisions as interpreted by the Court. While it is true that such a refund may be sought only in the framework of the substantive and procedural conditions laid down by the various relevant national laws, those conditions and the procedural conditions and rules governing actions at law for protecting the rights which individuals derive from the direct effect of Community law may not be less favourable than those relating to similar, domestic actions, nor be framed in a way such as to render virtually impossible the exercise of rights conferred by Community law.
Accordingly, a taxable person may claim, with retroactive effect from the date on which the national legislation contrary to the Sixth Directive came into force, a refund of VAT paid without being due, by following the procedural rules laid down by the domestic legal system of the Member State concerned, provided that those rules are no less favourable than those satisfying the abovementioned requirements.
C-62/93, [1995] EUECJ C-62/93, [1995] STC 805
Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 28-Jul-2005
The claimant had sought repayment of overpaid VAT, and the respondent resisted arguing that this would be an unjust enrichment. A reference to the European Court was sought.
Held: It was not possible to say that the House’s opinion was acte . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161085
A retail mail-order supplier, had run two promotions, a ‘self-introduction’ scheme and a ‘introduce a friend’ scheme. Under either scheme the introducer (once she or her friend had been approved, placed an order and paid for it) became entitled to receive, without payment, a household item (such as a toaster, a kettle or an iron) chosen from a list. These were not items in the Empire Stores catalogue and so they did not have a normal retail price.
Held: The fact that the items did not have a normal retail price was an essential distinction from Naturally Yours Cosmetics: ‘Where that value is not a sum of money agreed between the parties, it must, in order to be subjective, be the value which the recipient of the services constituting the consideration for the supply of goods attributes to the services which he is seeking to obtain and must correspond to the amount which he is prepared to spend for that purpose. Where, as here, the supply of goods is involved, that value can only be the price which the supplier has paid for the article which he is supplying without extra charge in consideration of the services in question’. Gifts to the introducers were vatable at the cost and not at the value to the donee even though consideration had been given.
Times 08-Jul-1994, C-33/93, [1994] ECR – I 2329, [1994] EUECJ C-33/93
Distinguished – Naturally Yours Cosmetics Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 23-Nov-1988
A cosmetics wholesaler offered to a beauty consultant, acting as retailer, a pot of rejuvenating cream at the special price of andpound;1.50. The consultant was to give the cream to a chosen retail customer (referred to as a hostess) as a reward for . .
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Westmorland Motorway Services Ltd CA 5-Feb-1998
Westmorland ran motorway service stations. Its practice, known to coach drivers, was to provide, without payment, a packet of cigarettes and a self-service meal (chosen from its usual menu) to any coach driver who brought a coach with at least . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161064
Europa The taxable amount in respect of a provision of services within the meaning of Article 11 A(1)(a) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 consists of the consideration actually received in return for the service provided. In the case of gaming machines offering a chance of winning (slot machines) which, pursuant to mandatory statutory requirements, are set in such a way that they pay out as winnings a certain percentage of the stakes inserted, the consideration actually received by the operator in return for making the machines available consists only of the proportion of the stakes which he can actually take for himself. Consequently, the aforementioned provision must be interpreted as meaning that the taxable amount in respect of such machines does not include the statutorily prescribed proportion of the total stakes inserted which corresponds to the winnings paid out to the players.
‘The consideration actually received by the operator in return for making the machines available consist only of the proportion of the stakes which he can actually take for himself.’ This was the commercial reality and was consistent with the aim of the Directive to tax the turnover which a trader ‘earns from his supplies of his goods and services’.
Advocate General Jacob
C-38/93, [1994] STC 543, [1994] EUECJ C-38/93
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: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161067
Whether a taxpayer is entitled to a refund of Value Added Tax, which was paid over many years, following a change in HMRC’s approach to the assessment of VAT on the game of bingo.
[2018] ScotCS CSIH – 78
Scotland
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.634461
APPEAL – Decision – Strike out application on ground that no decision yet made – Whether decision necessary under VATA 1994 s.83(c) – Yes – Whether on analysis a decision in this case – No – Application allowed – Trib Rules, r.1
[2006] UKVAT V19984
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.249832
The court was asked whether the Tribunal had erred in law in dismissing an appeal by Baxi Group Limited from a decision of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise, confirmed in a letter dated 3 June 2004, to refuse a voluntary disclosure claim for repayment of value added tax (‘VAT’) in respect of a loyalty reward scheme.
Lindsay J
[2006] EWHC 3353 (Ch)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Baxi Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 20-Jan-2006
VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – promotional scheme – manufacturer and distributor of domestic heating appliances awarding points to installers purchasing its appliances – points redeemable for gifts listed in catalogue -scheme run by marketing company . .
Appeal from – Baxi Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 20-Dec-2007
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.247502
EXCISE DUTY RELIEF – tied oil regime – delivery of oil by approved trader to non-approved trader – inadvertent breach of Regulations brought about by method of transportation – appeal dismissed
[2005] UKVAT V19263
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237963
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19262
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237961
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19250
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237971
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19269
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237959
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19270
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237957
ZERO-RATING – food – sports nutrition bar – an item of sweetened prepared food normally eaten with the fingers – whether ‘cake’ for the purposes of the exception – no – whether sufficiently similar to a traditional flapjack to be classified as cake – no – appeal dismissed – VATA 1994 S 30 and Sch 8 Group 1 Excepted item 2
[2005] UKVAT V19389
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237956
Value Added Tax – Recovery of tax overpaid – Section 80 VATA (as amended FA1997) – absence of transitional period for repayments in terms of amended provisions – terms of Business Briefs Nos 22/02 and 27/02 and related guidance issued by Respondents – Appeal allowed.
[2005] UKVAT V19327
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.238046
VAT – deduction of input tax – sufficiency of evidence of Appellant’s making taxable supplies – sufficiency of evidence of payment of input tax and circumstances relative thereto – VATTA 1994 Sections 24-26, VATA Regulations (SI 1995/2518) – Appeal refused.
[2005] UKVAT V19265
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237970
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19255
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237969
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19272
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237968
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19370
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237966
reasonable excuse appeal
[2006] UKVAT V19420
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237943
INPUT TAX – Pre Sinclair Collis – supply to the Appellant of space upon which to place cigarette vending machines – Appellant paid for the space by commission – Appellant created self billed invoices – no evidence that site owners had treated the supply as taxable – was Appellant entitled to reclaim input tax – no – appeal dismissed
[2006] UKVAT V19416
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237951
MOTOR VEHICLE – Vauxhall Crew Van – whether car because of folding rear seats – held commercial vehicle – appeal allowed
[2006] UKVAT V19425
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237954
VAT – PENALTIES – default surcharge – extra seven days allowed for payment of VAT by electronic means – intended same-day payment by CHAPS – written instruction given to bank for payment on seventh day by that means – unanticipated failure of bank to process instruction – held reasonable for taxpayer to have expected payment to be made in time – appeal allowed
[2005] UKVAT V19169
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229932
PRACTICE – out of time appeal – illness preventing Appellant from making returns on time – while still capable of working she could still have appealed surcharges
DEFAULT SURCHARGE – effect of long-term illness – reasonable excuse accepted for periods during which illness prevented the Appellant from making returns
[2006] UKVAT V19426
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237953
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2005] UKVAT V19226
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.230174
DEFAULT SURCHARGE – no-one appearing – changed address – duplicate forms supplied – history of defaults – payments late – appeal dismissed
[2005] UKVAT V19172
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229934
VAT – ZERO-RATING – whether work of removal of lead guttering of oriel bay window of protected building and associated drainpipe and addition of layer of slates work of alteration or repair and maintenance – held work that of alteration – appeal allowed
[2005] UKVAT V19176
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229935
VALUE ADDED TAX – claim for repayment of overpaid output tax – VATA 1994 s 80, VAT Regulations 1995 reg 35 – industrial and provident societies – output tax paid by one society later transferring its engagements to another – whether right to claim refund transferred – Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965, ss 16, 51, 54, 59, 74 – whether restriction by VATA of right to reclaim overpayment to person which made a payment contrary to principle of effectiveness – no – right to reclaim not transferred on transfer of engagements – appeal dismissed
[2005] UKVAT V19177
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229933
ZERO RATING – Equipment for handicapped persons – Supply of air filtration system for Appellant’s personal and domestic use – Appellant suffering from dystonia – Air conditioner combined with air filters to Appellant’s specifications to produce environmental control system – Whether system ‘designed solely for use by a handicapped person’ – Yes – VATA 1994, Sch 8, Gp 12, Item 2(g)
[2005] UKVAT V19174
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229936
DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Calculations of surcharge – Returns submitted late – Whether payments should be treated as made in time on account of excess payments in response to assessments – No – Whether payments on account should be treated as made where there was underclaimed input tax to which trader was entitled – No – Appeals dismissed
[2005] UKVAT V19178
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229931