Category: VAT

Hht Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 13 Jul 2005

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

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19169

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229932

Teji v Revenue and Customs: VDT 17 Jan 2006

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

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19426

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237953

Hospital of St John and St Elizabeth v Revenue and Customs: VDT 29 Jun 2005

VAT – ZERO RATING – CONSTRUCTION SERVICES -Relevant residential purpose – use as hospital or similar institution – treatment defining characteristic of hospital or similar institution – on the facts satisfied intended use solely for relevant residential purpose – no use as hospital or similar institution – were construction services supplied to intended user – intended user legal rights over the property and actively involved with service provision – Appellant meets these requirements, others do not – Appeal Allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19141

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229572

Enron Europe Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 25 Jul 2005

TAX POINT – Continuous supplies of gas and electricity – Netting agreement taking effect on Appellant going into administration – All outstanding transaction thereupon terminated – Subsequent calculation of outstanding balance – Payment of outstanding balance on agreed date – Tax point arising on date of payment or issue of invoice, whichever earlier – Calculated balance paid in period 9/02 – Further sums outstanding subject of litigation not paid or invoiced in period 9/02 – Whether outstanding sums fell to be declared in period 9/02, or tax point arose in that period – No – VAT Regs 1995, reg 86(1)

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19180

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229930

Canterbury Hockey Club v Revenue and Customs: VDT 30 Jun 2005

VDT EXEMPTION – Sport – Services of Hockey’s governing body – Governing body provides sport-related services to affiliated hockey clubs – Clubs are unincorporated associations – Whether services of governing body supplied to persons taking part in sport – Yes – EC Sixth Directive Art 13A.1(m) VAT Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 10, item 3

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19146

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229563

Oriental Delicacy Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 20 Jun 2005

Value Added Tax – pre-registration expenditure on fitting-out restaurant premises – invoices in respect of ‘services’ pre-dating registration by more than 6 months – whether recoverable as ‘input tax’ following on registration – Regulation 111(2) (d) of VAT Regulations (SI 1995/2518) and Article 17 of the Sixth Directive – Appeal refused.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19129

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229585

Olympia Technology Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 29 Jun 2005

INTEREST – Rate – Appeal against refusal of tax credit – Decision withdrawn before hearing – Determination of rate of interest under VAT Act 1994 s 84(8) – Whether tribunal is authorized to find the amount due to the taxpayer – Yes – Whether taxpayer’s entitlement to a repayment supplement under s 79 excludes any right to interest under s 84(8) – No – Whether rate of interest is as prescribed by FA 1996 s 197 and SI 1998/1461 – Yes – Whether start date for interest calculation is ten days from receipt of return – Yes

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19145

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.229583

Bollingmore Holdings Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 22 Feb 2005

DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Reasonable excuse – Shortage of funds – Bank refused to effect VAT payment notwithstanding an ‘unofficial overdraft’ that would have covered the payment – Whether in all circumstances Appellant was justified in relying on the unofficial overdraft – Yes – Whether a reasonable excuse – Yes – Appeal allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V18948

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.223173

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 which is compulsorily exempt from VAT covers the case where a tenant, for consideration, surrenders his lease and returns the immovable property to his immediate landlord. The same provision, which allows Member States to apply, in addition to the specified exceptions, further exclusions to the scope of the exemption for the letting of immovable property, does not authorize them to tax such consideration when the rent paid under the lease was exempt under the said rule. The relations created by a lease cannot be broken up.

Citations:

C-63/92, [1993] ECR I-6685, [1994] QB 571, [1994] STC 101, [1993] EUECJ C-63/92

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

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 . .
Distinguished – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160883

Muys’ en De Winter’s Bouwen Aannemingsbedrijf v Staatssecretaris van Financien: ECJ 27 Oct 1993

Europa Tax provisions – Harmonization of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive – Exemptions in respect of transactions relating to the granting of credit – Grant, by the supplier of goods or services, of deferral of payment of the price in return for the payment of interest – Exemption – Grant of deferral until delivery – Taking account of the interest as part of the consideration – Taxation. (Council Directive 77/388, Arts 11(A)(1)(a) and 13(B)(d)(1))
Conditions in a contract which required a credit transaction to be ‘clearly dissociable’ from an associated supply of goods would be justifiable to ‘prevent evasion, avoidance or abuse’: ‘This may be of particular importance in the case of transactions between connected parties who might seek artificially to convert the consideration for a taxable supply of goods or services into consideration for an exempt grant of credit by inflating the interest rate . . ‘

Citations:

C-281/91, [1993] EUECJ C-281/91

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – 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.

European, VAT

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160807

Beaulande v Directeur des services fiscaux de Nantes: ECJ 16 Dec 1992

ECJ Judgment – Although Article 33 of the Sixth Directive prohibits the maintenance or introduction of taxes which have the essential characteristics of VAT, with a view to preventing the introduction of taxes, duties and charges which, through being levied on the movement of goods and services in a way comparable to VAT, would jeopardize the functioning of the common system of VAT, it does not preclude the maintenance or introduction of other kinds of taxes, duties or charges, and in particular stamp duties, which do not have those characteristics.
It follows that the aforesaid provision must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude the introduction or maintenance of a national tax such as French stamp duty charged on the acquisition of building land in the event of a breach of the undertaking to build within the time-limit set by the relevant legislation. That duty is not a general tax; it is not applied at the different stages of a production and distribution process since it is charged only when the real estate passes into the ownership of the final consumer; it is not deductible from duty of the same kind paid on subsequent conveyances and the levying of the duty does not take account of the added value but is based on the full value of the property.

Citations:

C-208/91, [1992] EUECJ C-208/91

Links:

Bailii

European, VAT

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160759

Van Ginkel Waddinxveen v Inspecteur der Omzetbelasting: ECJ 12 Nov 1992

(Judgment) Article 26 of Directive 77/388: Sixth Directive, which concerns the special scheme applicable to travel agents in the matter of imposition of value added tax, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the transport of the traveller is not arranged by a travel agent or tour operator and that the latter merely provides the traveller with holiday accommodation is not such as to exclude the services provided by such undertakings from the field of application of that provision
The court said that the provision in the Directive: ‘makes the application of that article subject to the condition that the travel agent shall deal with customers in his own name and not as an intermediary. It is for the national court before which a dispute concerning the application of these provisions is brought to inquire, having regard to all the details of the case, and in particular the nature of the travel agent’s contractual obligations towards the traveller, whether or not that condition is met.’

Citations:

C-163/91, [1992] EUECJ C-163/91, [1996] STC 825

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

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.

VAT

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160728

Commission v Greece: ECJ 18 Apr 1991

Judgment – A Member State is in breach of its obligations under Article 95 of the EEC Treaty if, in connection with value added tax, it applies to spirits a system of differentiated rates arranged so that all products produced domestically fall within the most favourable tax category, whereas imported products, in respect of which there is no national production, fall, with a few exceptions, under the most heavily taxed category.
With regard to Article 95, there is either a similarity between, or sufficiently marked characteristics common to, spirits such as to enable it to be said that they are at least partly or potentially in competition.
As far as the possible degree of substitution between beverages is concerned, it is immaterial that those benefiting from the favourable rate are regarded as traditional national drinks and consumed extensively in the country concerned, whereas those taxed more heavily are regarded by the consumer as luxury products. For the purpose of measuring the possible degree of substitution it is impossible to restrict oneself to consumer habits in a Member State or in a given region. Those habits, which are essentially variable in time and space, cannot be considered to be immutable; the tax policy of a Member State must not therefore serve to crystallize given consumer habits with a view to consolidating an advantage acquired by national industries concerned to comply with them.

Citations:

C-230/89, [1991] EUECJ C-230/89

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EEC Treaty 95

European, VAT

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160311

Han and Yau t/a Murdishaw Supper Bar, and Others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 3 Jul 2001

The applicant claimed that proceedings under which he had been accused of fraud in dishonestly evading VAT liability were in reality criminal proceedings and that the minimum standards of a fair trial applied.
Held: The characterisation under the rules of such proceedings as civil was a starting point only. The fact that no sanction of imprisonment could apply was relevant but not determinative. In fact the allegation required proof of dishonesty, the potential penalties were substantial, and the purpose was punitive and deterrent. Rules relaxing the admissibility of evidence were convenient for the effective collection of taxes, but that was not a consideration when the proceedings were in their nature criminal.

Judges:

Potter LJ, Mance LJ, Nourse Sir

Citations:

Times 03-Aug-2001, Gazette 23-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1040, [2001] 1 WLR 2253

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6.1, Value Added Tax Act 1994 60(1), Finance Act 1994 8(1), VAT Tribunal Rules 1986

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Sewa Singh Gill and Paramjit Singh Gill CACD 31-Jul-2003
The appellants sought to challenge their convictions for cheating the Inland Revenue. They were accused of having hidden assets and income from the revenue. The appellants objected to the use at trial of material obtained in a ‘Hansard’ interview. . .
Cited – Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made.
Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Human Rights

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159489

Svenska International Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: HL 25 Mar 1999

When assessing the time of supply in a continuous supply of services, it did not take place until either payment was made or a tax invoice issued, and as between members of a group of companies, no opportunity arose to set its tax against input until then.

Citations:

Times 30-Mar-1999, Gazette 03-Jun-1999, [1999] UKHL 23, [1999] 1 WLR 769, [1999] 2 All ER 906

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Svenska International Plc CA 5-Jun-1997
Rules for recovery of input tax on subsidiary business for exempt supplies to be read as a whole. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group plc v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 22-May-2003
The landlord had elected to waive exemption to charging VAT on its lettings. The tenant relet the demised premises, but at first without charging VAT. It later charged VAT on the sublease, but the commissioners objected to the attempt of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159006

Co-Operative Wholesale Society Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 26 Jul 2000

The taxpayer appealed a decision of the VAT tribunal. The taxpayer entered into contracts with its members to provide services, including funeral services. Part of the payments was agreed to be in respect of exempt services, but the charge included an element for administration. The taxpayer asserted that they were not dissociable.
Held: The only possible way of reading the arrangement lead to the conclusion that the payment was for two services, of which one was liable to VAT. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Waller And Mr Justice Gage

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 227, [2000] EWCA Civ 227

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 Schedule 9 Group 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147260

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Pilgrims Language Courses Limited: CA 23 Jul 1999

A language school which sought to teach English was correct to include as part of that exempt supply, the cost of accommodation and catering. Transport to and from the airport and photographs necessary for the course were also exempt, being closely related to the course. Where however, the supplies were so combined as a mere device to avoid VAT, courts should be ready to find abuse.

Citations:

Times 22-Aug-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1939, [1999] STC 874

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 9, Value Added Tax (Education) (No 2) Order 1994 (1994 No 2969)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Commissioner of Customs and Excise v Pilgrims Language Courses Limited Admn 2-Jun-1998
. .

Cited by:

Applied – University of Leicester Students Union v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 21-Dec-2001
The student Union supplied soft drinks to students. They claimed this was closely associated with education and that activity was therefore exempt from VAT. The Union appealed a decision against them.
Held: The University charter did not . .
Appealed to – Commissioner of Customs and Excise v Pilgrims Language Courses Limited Admn 2-Jun-1998
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146854

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 given a Community law meaning and (b) that domestic legislation must be construed as far as possible so as to give effect to a Community directive which it has sought to implement.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1651, [1999] STC 701

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Sinclair Collis Limited Admn 9-Jul-1998
A licence fee paid to a shopkeeper for the installation of a cigarette vending machine in the shop and to maintain and operate it was a licence to occupy land and so was an exempt supply. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.146566

The ECU Group Plc v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Jul 2010

VAT – Financial services exemption – Appellant provided a service of managing the foreign currency exposure of a multi-currency loan provided to its client by a third party (a Lender) – whether the essential aims and features of the service were the execution of foreign exchange transactions – held, they were – whether the service was properly characterised as transactions concerning payments, transfers or currency within article 135(1)(d)(e) VAT Directive and item 1, Group 5, Schedule 9, VATA – held, it was- where the transactions were effected using a Prime Broker, held the service also fell within the exemption on the basis that it was the provision of intermediary services within item 5, Group 5, Schedule 9, VATA – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 297 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Financial Services

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.422306

Mayflower Theatre Trust Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 26 Aug 2005

VAT – INPUT TAX – Theatre engaged production companies to put on shows – whether the input tax arising from the consideration paid to the production companies was exclusively attributable to exempt supplies (sale of show tickets) or attributable to both taxable and exempt supplies – analysed each of the Appellant’s taxable supplies no direct and immediate link found between the consideration paid and any one of the taxable supplies – input tax arising from consideration paid exclusively attributable to exempt supplies – Appeal dismissed.
VAT – APPEALS – SECTION 85 VATA 1994 AGREEMENT – Previous Appeal by Appellants allowed by consent – did this Appeal constitute a section 85 agreement – yes – did the scope of the agreement prevent the Tribunal from adjudicating on whether the input tax arising from the consideration paid to the production companies during the relevant period was either attributable to exempt supplies or to both exempt and taxable supplies – no – because the scope of the agreement was limited to the cultural exemption issue – Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the disputed matter for the relevant period – Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19254

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.237958

Martin Group v Revenue and Customs: VDT 7 Sep 2005

Input Tax Claim Voluntary Disclosure, claim made and met in part, purported decision not advising of right of appeal, whether final determination, whether additional ground of claim required to be treated as a new claim or an amendment to the original claim.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19257

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.237973

McKay Demolitions (London) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 13 Sep 2005

INPUT TAX – Exclusion of credit for input tax – Motorcars – Taxable person a company – Company purchasing cars for directors’ use – Whether exception to exclusion unavailable on basis that the cars were available for use for private purposes – Appeal dismissed – Value Added Tax (Input Tax) Order 1992, SI 1992/3222, Article 7(2)(a)(iii), 7(2G)(b)

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19242

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230210

RP Ltd and others v Customs and Excise: VDT 11 Aug 2004

PRACTICE – Joint hearing – Application for appeals by separate appellants to be heard together – Carousels alleged – Separate facts – Powers of Tribunal under Rule 19(3) – Whether ‘necessary or expedient to ensure the speedy and just determination of the appeal’ – Held, not necessary for ‘just determination’ nor to ensure speed – Application by Customs dismissed – Trib. Rules 1986 r.19(3)

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18935

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230216

Telefoni v Revenue and Customs: VDT 23 Aug 2005

APPEAL – original hearing conducted partly in appellant’s absence and appeal dismissed – decision of first tribunal set aside at instance of appellant – fresh hearing of appeal conducted in appellant’s absence and appeal again dismissed without hearing evidence – decision of second tribunal set aside at instance of appellant – appellant failing to attend or be represented at hearing before third tribunal – absence inadequately explained – whether appellant afforded adequate opportunity to present his case – yes – whether incumbent upon third tribunal to hear evidence – no – appeal yet again dismissed without hearing evidence

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19223

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230200

Capital One Bank (Europe) Plc v Revenue and Customs: VDT 9 Sep 2005

VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – partially exempt trader – agreed special method for attribution of residual input tax – credit card bank – securitisation of credit card receivables – assignment of receivables to Jersey trustee – trustee holding assigned receivables on trust for Jersey company which issued loan notes on security of receivables – whether assignment capable of amounting to supply by bank or merely security for loan – when receivables paid by customers, moneys returned to credit card bank and collected receivables replaced by new receivables – whether replacements amount to supply – if supply, whether made for consideration – measure of consideration – whether any supply made by bank ‘incidental’ – whether trustee truly belonging outside Member States – whether special method denominator correctly compiled – Sixth VAT Directive, arts 9, 11, 13, 17, 19 – VAT Act 1994, ss 4, 9 26, Sch 5, Sch 9 Group 5, Item 1 – VAT Regulations 1995, regs 101, 102, 103 – VAT (Input Tax) (Specified Supplies) Order 1999, arts 2, 3 – VAT (Place of Supply of Services) Order 1992, art 16

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19238

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230205

Cirdan Sailing Trust v Customs and Excise: VDT 8 Dec 2004

Zero-rating – Transport – Transport of passengers – Appellant charters out manned yachts to schools and organizations for the welfare of young people – Whether Appellant’s supply is properly characterized as ‘transport of passengers . . in any . . ship’ – Yes – Whether a supply of exempt sporting facilities or education – No – VAT Act 1994 Sch 8 Gp 8 Item 4(a)
Zero-rating – Transport – Repair or maintenance of qualifying ship – Appellant charters out manned yachts to schools and youth organizations – Whether yacht is a ‘qualifying ship’ – Whether it is neither designed nor adapted for use for recreation or pleasure – Yes – VAT Act 1994 Sch 8 Gp 8 Item 1 and Note (A1)(a)

Citations:

[2004] UKVAT V18865

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230219

Grove Fresh Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 14 Sep 2005

VALUE ADDED TAX – zero-rating – two products consisting of the juices of vegetables – whether products were ‘other beverages (including fruit juices)’ and so standard-rated – yes – appeal dismissed – VATA 1994 S30(2) and Sch 8 Grp1 Item 1 Excepted Item 4

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19241

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230209

Miah v Revenue and Customs: VDT 12 Sep 2005

VAT – ASSESSMENTS – best judgment – allegation that effect of student population on takings of takeaway wrongly ignored by Customs – allegation that results of invigilations were applicable to business when owned by previous trader and should have been disregarded as against the Appellant – allegations rejected – appeal dismissed subject to adjustment of assessments to allow for clerical error

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19243

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230211

Nl Lewis (T/A Care Design) v Revenue and Customs: VDT 15 Aug 2005

INPUT TAX – Motor vehicle – Deduction of input tax in respect of lease charges – Appellant sole proprietor of business and owner (subject to lease) of vehicle – Vehicle insured for business and private use : no other cover available – Used by Appellant only for business purposes – Whether ‘made available for private use’ – Yes – VAT (Input Tax) Order 1992, art 7(1), (2), (2E), (2G)
MOTOR VEHICLE – Scale charges – Vehicle used by Appellant for business purposes only – Whether liable to scale charges – No – VATA 1994, s.56

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19210

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230195

Milligan v Revenue and Customs: VDT 2 Sep 2005

VAT – DIY BUILDERS SCHEME – Appellant constructed a bungalow at the rear of her home for use as self-contained accommodation for her elderly mother – planning permission prohibited the separate use and independent disposal of the bungalow – the bungalow did not meet the requirement of a building designed as a dwelling (Note 2 Group 5 Schedule 8 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994) – Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19224

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230212

P and C Morris Catering Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 12 Sep 2005

ASSESSMENT – pounds 7,927 incorrectly claimed input tax – three commercial vehicles under one tonne – assessment on the basis that the appellant failed to discharge burden of proof as to vehicles unladen weight – evidence in support of burden of proof – vehicles modified as Euromega Isuzu TFS 69 4 x 4 – evidence of vehicle unladen weight provided by manufacturer – on registration documentation – confirmed by single vehicle approval certificate – appellant discharged burden of proof – vehicles weighed one tonne – assessment not to best judgment – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19245

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230213

Pedegog Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 25 Aug 2005

VAT – default surcharge – company changing to annual accounting scheme – initial period fixed by HMRC at 10 months – notwithstanding company notified of 10 month accounting period trader assumed return would not be required until 12 months had elapsed -situation exacerbated by accountant having arranged for mail to be redirected following removal – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19228

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230197

Danielon v Revenue and Customs: VDT 12 Sep 2005

VAT – BUSINESS – acquisition as a going concern – assets used by a former restaurant business sold by executors of deceased restaurateur – incoming proprietor negotiating fresh lease with landlord – no transfer of goodwill – whether there existed such continuity as enabled the carrying on of substantially the same business as by deceased proprietor – no – whether incoming proprietor compulsorily registrable for VAT because deceased’s business transferred as a going concern – no – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19244

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230207

Harris and others (T/A the Marcia Inn) v Revenue and Customs: VDT 3 Aug 2005

VAT – PENALTIES – default surcharge – taxpayers’ bookkeeper admitted to hospital unexpectedly in order to give birth prematurely – reasonable excuse found for late submission of VAT return – cheque for tax returned unpaid by taxpayers’ bank because of unanticipated depletion of account by direct debit mistakenly initiated by another creditor – reasonable excuse found for non-payment of tax – balance of tax due remaining unpaid by reason of insufficiency of funds – tribunal precluded in law from finding reasonable excuse in respect of that tax – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19221

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230189

HCL Equipment Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 3 Aug 2005

VALUE ADDED TAX – takeover of a going concern – sale of plant and machinery by one company to another – vendor company predominantly engaged in hire of plant alone – purchaser company predominantly engaged in hiring plant with drivers – VAT (Special Provisions) Order 1995, art 5 – whether takeover of a going concern – yes – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19222

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230190

Jackson v Revenue and Customs: VDT 25 Aug 2005

VAT – civil evasion penalty – clothing trade – use of false invoices – whether bookkeeper implicated – whether conduct wholly attributable to dishonesty of sole director – yes – appeal dismissed
Human rights – right to a fair trial – whether undue delay – no – whether prejudiced by lack of appeal by company against assessment – no

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19225

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230192

Pervaiz v Revenue and Customs: VDT 30 Jun 2005

VDT OUTPUT TAX – CMT trader – extensive stock of unaccounted for hangers – suppression of sales – subject to a minor amendment on quantum – appeal dismissed
INPUT TAX – credit claimed for supplies suspected of being non existent – supplier in any event not a registered person – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19154

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.229587

London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Revenue and Customs: VDT 25 Jul 2005

OUTPUT TAX – Supplies made by Housing Trust to two associated bodies – All three parties separately registered for Value Added Tax – Whether the Appellant making taxable supplies or whether acting as agent/paymaster – Durham Aged Mineworkers’ Homes Association considered – Plantiflor followed – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19206

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230176

Osborne’s Big Man Shop v Revenue and Customs: VDT 16 Jun 2005

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – Deductibility of output tax – Taxpayer supplying goods by mail order – Change for postage and packing – Whether vale added tax payable on postage element – Case of Customs and Excise Commissioners v Plantiflor Ltd considered – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19124

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.229586

Balmoral Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 25 Aug 2005

VAT – requirement for security – appellant trading in mobile phones – appellant involved in chain of transactions in which supplier went missing having failed to account for or pay VAT said to have been paid by the appellant – requirement for security imposed following appellant’s failure to comply with HMRC’s instructions for those dealing in mobile phones – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19233

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230181

Clements v Revenue and Customs: VDT 18 Aug 2005

VALUE ADDED TAX – whether the Appellant properly registered for VAT purposes – paragraph 1(1)(a), Schedule 1, VATA – whether the exception from registration under paragraph 1(3), Schedule I, VATA applied – Customs refusing to take into account uncorroborated representations by the Appellant – Tribunal accepting the Appellant’s representations as to his expectations of the level of his future turnover as at the relevant date as truthful, and finding facts accordingly – finding that Customs had acted in a way in which no reasonable panel of Commissioners could have acted in refusing to give the Appellant retrospective exception from liability to register for VAT purposes under paragraph 1(3), Schedule 1, VATA – appeal against compulsory retrospective registration allowed – appeals against resultant assessment to VAT and penalty for belated notification raised under section 67 VATA allowed

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19216

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.230183

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v British Telecommunications Plc: CA 18 Mar 1998

The delivery of a quantity of cars is a separate supply from the purchases of the cars themselves and the VAT on the delivery charges is reclaimable as an input.

Citations:

Times 24-Mar-1998, Gazette 29-Apr-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 480

Statutes:

Value Added Tax (Input Tax) Order 1992 (1992 No 3222)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v British Telecommunications Plc Admn 5-Feb-1997
. .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v British Telecommunications Plc Admn 5-Feb-1997
. .
Appeal from – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.143958

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Svenska International Plc: CA 5 Jun 1997

Rules for recovery of input tax on subsidiary business for exempt supplies to be read as a whole.

Citations:

Times 03-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1793

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax (General) Regulations 1985 (1985 No 886) Reg 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Svenska International Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 25-Mar-1999
When assessing the time of supply in a continuous supply of services, it did not take place until either payment was made or a tax invoice issued, and as between members of a group of companies, no opportunity arose to set its tax against input . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.142189

Ougs Maintenance Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Nov 2020

VAT default surcharge – payment made by FPS on day before payment was due – not received by HMRC until three days later – bank did not transfer money by Faster Payment Scheme as amount exceeded appellant’s daily FPS limit – whether reasonable excuse – no – whether penalty disproportionate – no – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2020] UKFTT 466 (Tc)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.656858

‘Go Fair’ Zeitarbeit OHG v Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona: ECJ 12 Mar 2015

Judgment – References for a preliminary ruling – VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 132(1)(g) – Exemption for supplies of services closely linked to welfare and social security work – Concept of ‘bodies recognised as being devoted to social wellbeing’ – Temporary-work agency – Hiring out of qualified care workers – Exemption not allowed

Judges:

K Jurimae (Rapporteur), P

Citations:

C-594/13, [2015] EUECJ C-594/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:164

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2006/112/EC 132(1)(g)

Jurisdiction:

European

European, VAT

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.544270

Robinson v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Nov 2020

Value Added Tax – withdrawal of cash basis – taxpayer continued to use cash basis based on belief that this had been accepted – penalties for a deliberately inaccurate return – personal liability notice on director – whether or not deliberate behaviour – held not – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2020] UKFTT 477 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.656867