Category: VAT

North of England Zoological Society v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 20 Oct 1999

For VAT purposes, as opposed to other forms of taxation, educational purposes meant education within a more formal class or lesson type structure. A zoo, open to the public but employing education officers to assist with education of visitors was not exempt from charging VAT upon its entrance fees. The education offered did not come within this definition.

Citations:

Times 02-Nov-1999, Gazette 20-Oct-1999

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 31 Sch 9, Group 6, 1(a)

VAT, Education, VAT

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84344

Marks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 19 Jan 1999

Reclaims of overpaid VAT are governed by our domestic legislation, and not by European VAT law. Zero-rate is not a tax set under European law. Limitations on reclaims are therefore properly set by our national legislation. Unjust enrichment explored.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-1999

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 80

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, European

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83413

Marks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 19 Jan 2000

The doctrine of direct effect which gave rise for a private individual against a member state could only operate where the member failed to comply with the requirements of European Law to give effect to such law, and the requirement to put such rules into effect had to be unconditional and precise. A party could not use the doctrine to claim against a member state under European Law in general.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Referred to – Marks and Spencer plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 11-Jul-2002
The claimant challenged the reduction of the limitation period from six years to three for the reclaiming of overpaid VAT with immediate effect, depriving it of the opportunity to recover sums paid in excess. The company sold vouchers. It paid VAT . .

Cited by:

Reference from – Marks and Spencer plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 11-Jul-2002
The claimant challenged the reduction of the limitation period from six years to three for the reclaiming of overpaid VAT with immediate effect, depriving it of the opportunity to recover sums paid in excess. The company sold vouchers. It paid VAT . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Administrative, VAT

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83414

Julius Fillibeck Sohne Gmbh and Co Kg v Finanzamt Neustadt: ECJ 27 Nov 1997

Transport which was provided to a company’s workers in order to get to employment and where there was no real connection between the transport and the type of work was not a vatable supply.

Citations:

Times 27-Nov-1997

Statutes:

Council Directive 77/388/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT, Employment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82648

John Dee Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 17 Feb 1995

VAT Tribunal has an appellate not a supervisory jurisdiction – no re-hearing.

Citations:

Times 17-Feb-1995

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 40(1)(n)

Cited by:

Appeal from – John Dee Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 20-Jul-1995
There was no ‘fresh discretion’ power in the VAT tribunal on appeal if Commissioner’s decision flawed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82532

Institute of the Motor Industry v Customs and Excise Commissioners: ECJ 19 Nov 1998

A trade union could be any organisation of employees, workers, employers, independent professionals or traders which took upon itself representation of its members interests as against third parties, and any such is VAT exempt.

Citations:

Times 19-Nov-1998

Statutes:

Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC Art 13(A)(1)(1)

VAT, European

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82384

House (T/A P and J Autos) v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 7 Jan 1994

A VAT assessment issued by the Commissioners may cover several periods if the figures are calculable.

Citations:

Ind Summary 10-Jan-1994, Times 07-Jan-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – House T/A P and J Autos v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 20-Oct-1995
A global assessment to VAT over several periods made by the Commissioners was not invalid just because separate assessments were also possible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81490

Gus Merchandise Corporation Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 25 Oct 1993

A taxpayer accepting the Scheme H calculation basis cannot reclaim overpayments.

Citations:

Ind Summary 25-Oct-1993

Cited by:

Appeal from – Gus Merchandise Corporation Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 24-Oct-1994
The Commissioners’ general tax management powers include a power to enter into a binding contract with taxpayers as to the method of calculation of Excess VAT paid on sales to agents was not recoverable since there was a binding agreement. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81094

Georgiou and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 19 Oct 1995

The VAT tribunal may assess whether the Commissioner had acted on the basis of his best judgment. Evans LJ discussed appeals on fact disguised as appeals on law: ‘There is a well-recognised need for caution in permitting challenges to findings of fact on the ground that they raise this kind of question of law. That is well seen in arbitration cases and in many others. It is all too easy for a so-called question of law to become no more than a disguised attack on findings of fact which must be accepted by the courts. As this case demonstrates, it is all too easy for the appeals procedure to the High Court to be misused in this way. Secondly, the nature of the factual inquiry which an appellate court can and does undertake in a proper case is essentially different from the decision-making process which is undertaken by the tribunal of fact. The question is not, has the party upon whom rests the burden of proof established on the balance of probabilities the facts upon which he relies, but, was there evidence before the tribunal which was sufficient to support the finding which it made? In other words, was the finding one which the tribunal was entitled to make? Clearly, if there was no evidence, or the evidence was to the contrary effect, the tribunal was not so entitled.
It follows, in my judgment, that for a question of law to arise in the circumstances, the appellant must first identify the finding which is challenged; secondly, show that it is significant in relation to the conclusion; thirdly, identify the evidence, if any, which was relevant to that finding; and, fourthly, show that that finding, on the basis of that evidence, was one which the tribunal was not entitled to make. What is not permitted, in my view, is a roving selection of evidence coupled with a general assertion that the tribunal’s conclusion was against the weight of the evidence and was therefore wrong. A failure to appreciate what is the correct approach accounts for much of the time and expense that was occasioned by this appeal to the High Court.’

Judges:

Evans LJ

Citations:

Times 19-Oct-1995, [1996] STC 463

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 83 84

Cited by:

Cited – Gaines-Cooper v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 13-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the domicile of the tax-payer. He had a domicile of origin in the UK, but asserted that he had acquired a domicile of choice in the Seychelles. The Special Commissioners had allowed, in assessing the domicile at any time, of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Litigation Practice

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.80799

Frank Galliers Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 15 Feb 1993

Reasonable excuse for misdeclaration on VAT return. Where a company relied upon the return having been prepared by someone else, the tribunal could look behind the assertion to examine the underlying reason for the misdeclaration. It should be no more difficult to establish the reasonable cause excuse when the company had relied upon a third party than if the return had been prepared internally.

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-Feb-1993

Statutes:

Finance Act 1985 32(2)(b)

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.80658

Customs and Excise Commissioners v Wellington Private Hospital Ltd and Others: QBD 30 May 1995

Medicines provided by hospitals from own stocks and prostheses are exempt supplies.

Citations:

Ind Summary 30-May-1995

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 8 grp 12 1 and 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – British United Provident Association Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise; etc Admn 23-Jan-1997
In determining whether what would otherwise be two supplies should be regarded as a single supply the court has to ask itself whether one element is an ‘integral part’ of the other, or is ‘ancillary’ or ‘incidental’ to the other; or (in the . .

Cited by:

See also – British United Provident Association Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise; etc Admn 23-Jan-1997
In determining whether what would otherwise be two supplies should be regarded as a single supply the court has to ask itself whether one element is an ‘integral part’ of the other, or is ‘ancillary’ or ‘incidental’ to the other; or (in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79744

Customs and Excise Commissioners v Dennis Rye Ltd: QBD 25 Jul 1995

The builder had purchased two plots of land which it held as trading stock. It sought to set off the the VAT on the costs, but the issue was how it should have been apportioned with respect to the acquisition of goods or services and non-taxable residual inputs including its office supplies.
Held: The commisioners had to find a fair apportionment to taxable supplies. The taxpayers own calculations had distorted the picture, and the tax paid on the acquisition of the two plots should have been excluded.

Judges:

McCullough J

Citations:

Ind Summary 21-Aug-1995, (1996) STC 27

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 15(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79723

Customs and Excise Commissioners v Marchday Holdings Ltd: QBD 31 Jul 1995

A before and after test is to be used to see whether a work is a new building or a conversion of an old building.

Citations:

Ind Summary 31-Jul-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Commissioners for Customs and Excise v Marchday Holdings Limited CA 11-Dec-1996
Extensive work on an existing building may be more than a conversion and therefore may be zero-rated. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Commissioners for Customs and Excise v Marchday Holdings Limited CA 11-Dec-1996
Extensive work on an existing building may be more than a conversion and therefore may be zero-rated. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Construction

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79734

Customs and Excise Commissioners v A and D Goddard (A Firm): ChD 17 May 2001

The taxpayer had re-claimed input VAT on mobile phones, but no output tax was due because they were to be sold outside the UK. The commissioners alleged fraud and refused the refund. On appeal the commissioners at first withdrew the allegation of fraud, and sought to add other grounds. They were allowed a time within which to file new pleadings. In the absence of such filing, the appeal was allowed, despite a request to re-instate the allegations of fraud. The Commissioners in turn appealed. They filed. Arguments they sought to enter had not been raised earlier. The Commissioners had still disclosed no arguable or sustainable case, and it would be wrong for an appeal court to substitute its own discretion for that of the tribunal, merely in order to preserve a substantial sum for the public revenue..

Citations:

Gazette 17-May-2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Taxes Management

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79746

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 twenty passengers and stopped for at least thirty minutes. The issue was to quantify the non-monetary consideration for Westmorland’s taxable supply of cigarettes, food and soft drink.
Held:The consideration was to be determined by reference to Westmorland’s normal retail prices (and not the cost to Westmorland of the goods supplied). The court summarised the effect of the Naturally Yours and Empire Stores cases: ‘The principles derived from the two cases to which I have referred are as follows. (1) Where the consideration is not money, it must be capable of being expressed in monetary terms, and there must be a direct link between the relevant supply and that which is alleged to have been the consideration for it. (2) The value of the non-monetary element must be assessed on a subjective rather than an objective basis. (3) Where the parties have expressly or implicitly attributed a value to that element in money terms that determines its value. (4) Where, however, the parties have not done this, the value can only be the price which the supplier has paid for the articles which he is supplying free of charge in return for the services in question.

Judges:

Hutchinson LJ

Citations:

Times 05-Feb-1998, [1998] STC 431

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Westmorland Motorway Admn 21-Feb-1997
. .
Cited – 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 – Empire Stores v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 2-Jun-1994
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 . .

Cited by:

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.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79361

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Professional Footballers Association (Entertainments) Ltd: HL 24 Feb 1993

The Association held a dinner. Tickets were sold and the proceeds of the ticket sales were used to purchase the trophies. The Commissioners sought to charge output tax on the trophies, suggesting they were a separate supply.
Held: Where a direct link could be shown between the giving of business assets and receipts from others who were not themselves recipients, the paragraph did not apply. The purchase of the tickets constituted the consideration for the supply of the trophies.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Apr-1993, Independent 24-Feb-1993

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 Sched 2 Para 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79394

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Croydon Hotel and Leisure Company Ltd: QBD 1 Jun 1995

Assessment to be for time entitlement to input arose, not period when deducted.

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-1995

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 Sch 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Croydon Hotel and Leisure Co Ltd CA 8-Aug-1996
The limitation period on recovery by Commissioners runs from date of return, not the accounting period. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Croydon Hotel and Leisure Co Ltd CA 8-Aug-1996
The limitation period on recovery by Commissioners runs from date of return, not the accounting period. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79409

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Reed Personnel Services Ltd: QBD 13 Apr 1995

A company providing agency nurses was not itself providing nursing services and was not exempt from VAT. Where a tripartite contract was unclear on the liability for VAT, the tribunal was to look on it as a whole. It was the function of the Tribunal to hear the evidence and to ascertain from the whole facts of the case whether there was a supply for VAT purposes.

Citations:

Times 13-Apr-1995, Ind Summary 01-May-1995, [1995] STC 588

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 9 grp 7-1-d

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Fengate Developments (A Partnership) v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 1-Dec-2004
Land was transferred by a partnership to one of the partners and his wife. The consideration stated in the transfer was andpound;125,000, but each transferee had paid a similar sum into the partnership account. The respondents said that VAT should . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79350

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Leightons Ltd; Same v Eye-Tech Opticians: QBD 13 Apr 1995

Opticians supply of glasses and of eye tests are separate of goods and services. The dispensing and fitting of spectacles was a separate service from supply of spectacles.

Citations:

Times 13-Apr-1995, Ind Summary 30-May-1995

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 40(1), Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 9 grp7 item 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79336

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Le Rififi Ltd: QBD 2 Aug 1993

One assessment covering numerous accounting periods constitutes a single global assessment. If any part of a global VAT assessment is time barred, then the whole assessment fails.

Citations:

Times 02-Aug-1993, Ind Summary 30-Aug-1993

Statutes:

Finance Act 1985 22(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appealed from – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Le Rififi Ltd CA 14-Dec-1994
One paper assessment covering several tax periods need always not be treated as just one assessment. This was a question of fact to be decided on the particular circumstances. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Limitation

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79335

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Nomura Property Management Services Ltd: QBD 21 Mar 1994

A patent error did not nullify a VAT return, and a serious mis-declaration existed despite the fact that a correction had been filed before a penalty notice was issued, and the penalty notice remained valid and appropriate.

Citations:

Times 22-Mar-1994, Ind Summary 21-Mar-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79343

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Machenrys (Hairdressers) Ltd and Others: QBD 15 Feb 1993

A hairdresser’s shop was liable for VAT for work done by sub-contractor staff where the fees taken by the sub-contractors were shared by the shop. This remained so even if the individual hairdressing sub-contractors were not themselves liable for VAT because of their low turnover.

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-Feb-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79340

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Robert Gordon’s College: ChD 6 Sep 1994

The self-supply rules applied despite the use by the taxpayer of an intermediate lease and a separate company to carry on certain activities.

Citations:

Times 06-Sep-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Robert Gordon’s College v Customs and Excise Commisssioners HL 27-Nov-1995
Input tax was recoverable by a school sports centre management, despite the use by the school. Self supply transactions must be looked at each individually, not as a whole series. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Robert Gordon’s College v Customs and Excise Commisssioners HL 27-Nov-1995
Input tax was recoverable by a school sports centre management, despite the use by the school. Self supply transactions must be looked at each individually, not as a whole series. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79352

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Liverpool Society of Performing Arts: CA 1 Apr 1999

Out of country supplies are not to be treated as taxable supplies in order to identify basis for input tax to be apportioned between taxable and exempt supplies. Out of country supplies not to be included in denominator.

Citations:

Times 01-Apr-1999

Statutes:

Value Added Tax (General) Regulations 1985 (1985 No 886) Part V

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79338

B J Rice and Associates v Customs and Excise Commissioners: QBD 18 Apr 1994

Time of supply on continuous service on invoice or payment- even after registrar.

Citations:

Ind Summary 18-Apr-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – B J Rice and Associates (A Firm) v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 14-Feb-1996
Liability for VAT was determined at date of supply of services not date of bill. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – B J Rice and Associates (A Firm) v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 14-Feb-1996
Liability for VAT was determined at date of supply of services not date of bill. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.78428

B J Rice and Associates (A Firm) v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 14 Feb 1996

Liability for VAT was determined at date of supply of services not date of bill.

Citations:

Times 14-Feb-1996, [1996] STC 581

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 4 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – B J Rice and Associates v Customs and Excise Commissioners QBD 18-Apr-1994
Time of supply on continuous service on invoice or payment- even after registrar. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – B J Rice and Associates v Customs and Excise Commissioners QBD 18-Apr-1994
Time of supply on continuous service on invoice or payment- even after registrar. . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group Plc ChD 2000
The taxpayer sought to recover tax it had paid on VAT on rents. It had sublet and at first not charged VAT, but later changed its mind and charged VAT. The Commissioners objected to the reclaim for the earlier period.
Held: The tribunal’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.78041

Auto Lease Holland BV v Bundesamt fur Finanzen: ECJ 6 Feb 2003

The court identified the need to give an autonomous meaning to the phrase ‘supply of goods’ in article 5(1) of the Sixth Directive as follows: ‘ . . .. it is clear from the wording of that provision that ‘supply of goods’ does not refer to the transfer of ownership in accordance with the provisions prescribed by the applicable national law but covers any transfer of tangible property by one party which empowers the other party to dispose of it as if he were the owner of the property. The purpose of the Sixth Directive might be jeopardised if the preconditions for a supply of goods . . .. varied from one Member State to another, as do the conditions governing the transfer of ownership under civil law.’

Judges:

M. Wathelet, P

Citations:

[2003] ECR 1-1317, C-185/01, [2003] EUECJ C-185/01, [2005] STC 598

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Revenue and Customs v Debenhams Retail Plc CA 18-Jul-2005
The store introduced a system whereby when a customer paid by credit card, the charges made to them for card handling were expressed as a separate amount on the receipt. The store then said that VAT was payable only on the net amount allocated to . .
Applied – Revenue and Customs v Loyalty Management UK Ltd ChD 22-Jun-2006
The taxpayer operated a substantial loyalty reward scheme (Nectar) for assorted companies. The Revenue appealed against an order allowing the company to reclaim input VAT. The court was asked now: ‘what is the proper characteristic, for VAT . .
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 . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.179497

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 gave the rate of charge at 10 per cent. The Act allowed the commisioners to set a form of notice, but this had not been done. The requirement was intended to prevent value shifting between taxable and exempt supplies. That purpose was satisfied by the form actually used. The contract set the amount at the time of the contract. A requirement which did not allow the exemption for the insurance service would be contrary to European law: ‘the Commissioners’ construction does not conform to the terms of the Sixth Directive and it is therefore necessary to adopt the alternative construction which does. I would therefore allow the appeal and declare that the taxpayer is entitled to exemption for the consideration attributable to insurance-related services during the relevant period.’ (Lord Slynn of Hadley dissenting)

Judges:

Hoffmann, Slynn of Hadley, Woolf, Hope of Craighead, Walker of Gestingthorpe, LL

Citations:

Times 21-Feb-2003, [2003] UKHL 7, [2003] STC 419, [2003] 1 WLR 656, 2003 SLT 355, [2003] BVC 249, [2003] 1 CMLR 37, 2003 SC (HL) 21, 2003 GWD 8-239, 2003 SCLR 222, [2003] BTC 5193, [2003] STI 267, [2003] 1 All ER 801

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 9 Group 2 Note (5), EC Sixth Directive on turnover taxes (77/388/EEC)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appeal from – Cr Smith Glaziers (Dunfermline) Ltd Against A Decision of Edinburgh Vat and Duties Tribunal OHCS 16-Feb-2001
. .
Cited – Jeunehomme and Others v Belgian State; Jorion v Belgium State ECJ 14-Jul-1988
It was legitimate for Belgium to require, as a condition of a VAT deduction, that the invoice on the sale of a motor car should contain a good deal of information enabling the car to be identified and thereby to prevent substitution and fraud. But . .
Cited – Ampafrance SA v Directeur des Services Fiscaux de Maine-et-Loire ECJ 19-Sep-2000
Europa 1. Council Decision 89/487, adopted on the basis of Article 27 of Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, which provides that a Member State . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd HL 16-Mar-1989
The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation . .
Cited – Stichting Uitvoering Financiele Acties v Staatssecretaris Van Financien (Judgment) ECJ 15-Jun-1989
For VAT the general rule is that a turnover tax is levied on all services supplied for consideration by a taxable person. Exemptions are to be strictly construed in the VAT legislation. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Cr Smith Glaziers (Dunfermline) Ltd Against A Decision of Edinburgh Vat and Duties Tribunal OHCS 16-Feb-2001
. .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.179501

Szef Krajowej Administracji Skarbowej v Gmina Ryjewo: ECJ 25 Jul 2018

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 167, 168 and 184 – Deduction of input tax – Adjustment – Immovable property acquired as capital goods – Initial allocation to an activity which does not confer entitlement to deduct input tax and subsequently also to an activity subject to VAT – Public body – Taxable-person status at the time of the taxable transaction

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:595

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Szef Krajowej Administracji Skarbowej v Gmina Ryjewo ECJ 19-Apr-2018
ECJ Common System of Value Added Tax – Deduction of Input Tax – Opinion – Request for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax – Deduction of input tax – Acquisition of capital goods – Allocation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.656212

E Lats v Valsts ienemumu dienests: ECJ 10 Apr 2018

Taxation – Vat – Notion of ‘Second-Hand Goods, Precious Metals or Stones’ – Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax (VAT) – Notion of ‘second-hand goods’ – Notion of ‘precious metals or precious stones’

Judges:

Bobek AG

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:226, [2018] EUECJ C-154/17 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608635

Biosafe – Industria De Reciclagens v Flexipiso – Pavimentos SA: ECJ 12 Apr 2018

Taxation – Vat – Principle of Fiscal Neutrality – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 63, 167, 168, 178 to 180, 182 and 219 – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Right to deduct VAT – Period allowed by national law for exercising that right – Deduction of additional VAT paid to the State that was the subject of documents rectifying the initial invoices following a tax adjustment – The date from which the period starts to run

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:249, [2018] EUECJ C-8/17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608630

Commission v Portugal C-524/10: ECJ 8 Mar 2012

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Common system of value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 296 to 298 – Common flat-rate scheme for farmers – Flat-rate compensation percentage set at nil rate

Citations:

[2012] EUECJ C-524/10

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Opinion – Commission v Portugal C-524/10 ECJ 22-Sep-2011
ECJ (Taxation) Common system of value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – input tax – Common flat-rate farmers – Compensation package replacing the deduction of input tax – Percentage draw – Conditions . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608373

Cellular Solutions (T Wells) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 22 Nov 2006

REPAYMENT SUPPLEMENT – whether period exceeded or covered by period for raising and answering of reasonable inquiries – meaning of inquiry – determining the start date of inquiry – repayment made while inquiries continued – on the facts period exceeded in one case only

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19903

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.247535

Taylor Wimpey Plc v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 26 Feb 2018

VAT – Builder’s Block restricting deduction of input tax for certain items on a supply of a new dwelling – whether Claim Items were incorporated in any part of the building – whether certain Claim Items were ordinarily installed by builders as fixtures – whether input tax on any Claim Items which were the subject of a separate standard-rated supply, where time limits precluded an assessment of output tax on that supply, must be offset by that output tax – VATA, s 81(3), (3A)

Citations:

[2018] UKUT 55 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.606444

Cavendish Green Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 8 Mar 2018

VAT – zero-rating – sale of part of building designed as a dwelling – whether requirement for statutory planning consent satisfied at time of sale- VATA 1994 schedule 8 group 5 Note (2)-whether fresh evidence should be admitted on appeal no-appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2018] UKUT 66 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.606445

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 vending machines on shop premises, with the shop-owners taking a proportion of the takings. They claimed exemption from VAT on the agreements as being ‘lettings of immovable property.’
Held: The agreements were not such lettings of immoveable property, and were liable to VAT. The agreements were not lettings of a space for occupation, and the actual position occupied was not material to the agreement, the rights only operated whilst the shop was open, and there was no right to exclude the ‘landlord’.

Judges:

CWA Timmermans, P

Citations:

[2003] BVC 374, C-275/01, Times 30-Jun-2003, [2003] EUECJ C-275/01, [2003] ECR I-5965, [2003] 2 CMLR 36, [2003] CEC 452, [2003] STC 898, [2003] STI 1070, [2003] BTC 5318

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of May 17 1977

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Reference 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 . .
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 . .

Cited by:

Reference to – 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: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.183782

Marcandi Limited, trading as ‘Madbid’ v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs: ECJ 7 Mar 2018

(Taxation – Opinion) – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Issue of credits that can be used to place bids in online penny auctions and whose value may be credited towards the price of goods purchased directly from the company running the auctions – Article 2(1)(a) and (c) – Supply of services or goods for consideration – Preliminary transaction – Article 65 – Payment on account – Article 73 – Taxable amount – Article 79(b) – Discount covering the whole price

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:164, [2018] EUECJ C-544/16 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.606014

Dobre v Ministerul Finantelor Publice: ECJ 7 Mar 2018

(Vat – Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Revocation of identification for VAT purposes – Obligation to pay VAT collected in the period during which the VAT identification number is revoked – Non-recognition of the right to deduct VAT relating to purchases made during that period

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:161, [2018] EUECJ C-159/17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.606000

Reeves v Revenue and Customs (Vat – Builders : Do-It-Yourself): FTTTx 23 Mar 2016

VALUE ADDED TAX – DIY Housebuilders – section 35 VATA 1994 – Notes 16 and 18 Group 5 Schedule 8 VATA 1994 – demolition of building leaving a gable wall prior to rebuilding – whether construction of a building – whether construction of a new building or reconstruction and enlargement or extension of existing building – whether an existing building – whether gable wall was a facade – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 195 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.561922

SP Wound Components v Revenue and Customs: VDT 26 Oct 2006

VAT – PENALTIES – default surcharge – electronic payment by method resulting in receipt of tax later than 7 calendar days after the due date – repetition of circumstances of previous late payment – taxpayer warned on previous occasion of need to ensure tax received within the 7-day concessionary period – cash-flow difficulty not such as to provide reasonable excuse having regard to statutory exclusion – no reasonable excuse apparent – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19836

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.246181

SFU Barbers Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 26 Oct 2006

VAT: REGISTRATION AND NOTICE OF SECURITY – Appellant purchased the assets and hairdressing business as a going concern – the Appellant contended that it was a property leasing business charging the hairdressers chair rentals and service charges – the facts found demonstrated that the hairdressers were either employees or providing services as sub-contractors to the Appellant – Appellant making taxable supplies of hairdressing services to the customers – anticipated annual turnover of pounds 800,000 – Respondents entitled to register compulsorily the Appellant for VAT – the former hairdressing business was run by the same principals as for the Appellant company – the former business owed substantial amounts in unpaid VAT – Appellant posed a real risk to the protection of the revenue – Appeal dismissed with costs order

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19851

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.246179

Magna Kansei Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 22 Nov 2006

VALUE ADDED TAX – default surcharge – instructions for electronic payment submitted to bank 13 minutes after cut-off time – payment arriving one day late – whether reasonable excuse – whether Appellant prevented by unforeseen circumstance from making timely payment – no – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19905

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.247544

Newport County AFC Social Club Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 12 Oct 2006

Supply for a consideration – did the Appellant receive monies for granting Founder Membership – payment by ‘200 Club’ – direct link between supply and monies – whether there was agreement which identified reciprocal obligations – whether reciprocal performance. Schedule 9 Group 9 VATA 1994 – whether Appellant non-profit making – whether objects in the public domain and philanthropic or civic in nature.

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19807

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.246173

MSD (Darlington) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 20 Nov 2006

VALUE ADDED TAX – default surcharge – taxpayer entering into major contract – supplier providing services to enable taxpayer to perform contract – available time-frame very short – supplier failing to provide service – taxpayer able to perform contract only at great additional cost – cash flow adversely affected – inability to meet VAT liability on time – whether reasonable excuse – yes – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2006] UKVAT V19897

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.247548

Adelekun v Revenue and Customs (VAT): UTTC 7 Aug 2020

VAT – appeal against HMRC’s decision to amend effective date of registration – whether FTT correct to find that the evidence in support was the same as advanced on a previous appeal where the appellant had been unsuccessful – no, new evidence was submitted – however even when new evidence considered appellant’s appeal on registration dismissed – appeal on input tax refusals in later period allowed in part.

Citations:

[2020] UKUT 244 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.655544

Commission v Germany – C-380/16: ECJ 8 Feb 2018

Taxation – Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfill obligations – Taxation – Value Added Tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112 / EC – Article 73 – Taxable amount – Articles 306 to 310 – Special scheme for travel agents – Exclusion from this sales scheme to obliged undertakings – Overall determination of the taxable amount for a given period – Incompatibility

Citations:

C-380/16, [2018] EUECJ C-380/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 04 April 2022; Ref: scu.604715

Phoenix Foods Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 Jan 2018

Vat – Zero-Rating : Food, Etc – VALUE ADDED TAX – whether bicarbonate of soda sold as baking ingredient is ‘food of a kind used for human consumption’ and so zero-rated for VAT purposes – section 30(2) and item 1 Group 1 Schedule 8 Value Added Tax Act 1994 – appeals allowed

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 18 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 04 April 2022; Ref: scu.604361