Category: VAT

Highlake Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Dec 2016

FTTTx (Income Tax and National Insurance Contributions) Income Tax and National Insurance Contributions (NICs) – security for payment of PAYE and NICs – Income Tax Pay as You Earn Regulations 2003, Part 4a – Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001, Sch 4 – Value Added Tax – security for payment of VAT -para 4 Sch 11 Value added Tax act 1994 – no arrears at date of decision – whether requirement justified – whether supervisory or appellate jurisdiction – supervisory – reasonableness of decision – information available at date of decision only – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 808 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, VAT, Taxes – Other

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573987

Teletape v Revenue and Customs (Vat – Assessments : Time Limits): FTTTx 30 Nov 2016

FTTTx VAT – misdeclaration penalties – two year time limit for assessment – whether time runs from withdrawal of appeal against substantive assessment – whether Tribunal bound by House of Lord’s decision in Anufrijeva to find that assessment made only when notified – HMRC’s failure to follow published guidance – issuance of notification to wrong person – appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 797 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573960

Smith v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Nov 2016

FTTTx (Vat – Diy Housebuilders’ Scheme) VAT – DIY housebuilders’ scheme – VAT charged at 17.5% – VAT refunded at 5% – correct level of refund -unjust enrichment – HELD – VAT refundable at 17.5% for earlier periods – unjust enrichment – outside jurisdiction – appeal allowed in part.

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 783 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Construction

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573959

Wearside Civil Engineering Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Nov 2016

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – zero rating – whether spa pools supplied by appellant correctly zero-rated in accordance with Item 2(g) Group 12 Schedule 8 VATA 1994 as ‘appliances designed solely for use by’ a disable person – held: yes, appeal allowed.

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 780 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573963

Authentik Language Learning Resources Ltd (In Liquidation) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Dec 2016

FTTTx (Vat – Registration : Cancellation of) VAT – Registration – supplies from other member states (Schedule 2 VATA 1994)- whether HMRC correct to refuse cancellation of registration – yes – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 826 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573970

Multimedia Computing Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 22 Nov 2016

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – disposal of first appellant’s business to third party using second appellant as Jersey-resident SPV – first appellant providing outsourcing services – whether second appellant had fixed UK establishment – VATA ss 4, 7A, 9 – fixed UK establishment demonstrated – appeals dismissed

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 779 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573954

Euro Tyre BV – Sucursal em Portugal v Autoridade Tributaria e Aduaneira: ECJ 9 Feb 2017

(Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 131 and 138 – Preconditions for the exemption of an intra-Community supply – VAT Information Exchange System (VIES) – Purchaser’s failure to register – Refusal to grant the exemption – Whether permissible

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:106, [2017] EUECJ C-21/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573933

Cabvision Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 29 Nov 2013

FTTTx VAT – Consideration – Other -arrangements similar to those used in Tower MCashback – appellant sold software to LLP investment vehicle – purchase funded by member subscriptions and debt incurred to bank 1 – debt guaranteed by bank 2 – guarantee secured by deposit made by appellant – appellant paid VAT on andpound;22,602,979 received from LLP – whether correct VAT was lesser amount because some of that amount was security for bank loan to LLP and received subject to restrictions – yes – loan transaction which funded purchase and restrictions on the amount received elements of the same transaction – VAT due on amount actually received by appellant which was lesser amount taking account of the banking arrangements – alternatively as argued by the appellant VAT was lesser amount because later settlement of dispute reduced price through a collateral oral agreement between the appellant and the LLP – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2013] UKFTT 721 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.519594

United Biscuits (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 22 Sep 2011

FTTTx Zero rating – food – savoury snacks made of a wheat and potato blend – Excepted Item 5 Group 1 Schedule 8 VAT Act 1994 – are they similar products to potato crisps – no – are they made from the potato – no – appeal allowed.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 673 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.449588

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 charges amounted, at least in part, to third party consideration paid by LMUK to the redeemers for the supply of goods and services to collectors, but had declined to give a concluded answer in the absence of more detail.
Held: The ECJ judgment must be considered incomplete, and the Court had to make its own assessment. The Commissioners appeal was dismissed (Wilson and Carnwath LL dissenting). Though no payment had been made as between the company and the consumer rights had been created and those were properly reflected in the invoices on which the VAT reclaims were based.
Decisions about the application of the VAT system are highly dependent upon the factual situations involved. A small modification of the facts can render the legal solution in one case inapplicable to another
Lord Reed explained: ‘The speeches in Redrow should not be interpreted in a manner which would conflict with the principle, stated by the Court of Justice in the present case, that consideration of economic realities is a fundamental criterion for the application of VAT. . [The judgments in Redrow cannot have been intended to suggest otherwise. On the contrary, the emphasis placed upon the fact that the estate agents were instructed and paid by Redrow, and had no authority to go beyond Redrow’s instructions, and upon the fact that the object of the scheme was to promote Redrow’s sales, indicates that the House had the economic reality of the scheme clearly in mind. When, therefore, . . Lord Millett asked, ‘Did he obtain anything – anything at all – used or to be used for the purposes of his business in return for that payment?’, [that question] should be understood as being concerned with a realistic appreciation of the transactions in question.
Reflecting the point just made, it is also necessary to bear in mind that consideration paid in respect of the provision of a supply of goods or services to a third party may sometimes constitute third party consideration for that supply, either in whole or in part. The speeches in Redrow should not be understood as excluding that possibility. Economic reality being what it is, commercial businesses do not usually pay suppliers unless they themselves are the recipient of the supply for which they are paying (even if it may involve the provision of goods or services to a third party), but that possibility cannot be excluded a priori. A business may, for example, meet the cost of a supply of which it cannot realistically be regarded as the recipient in order to discharge an obligation owed to the recipient or to a third party. In such a situation, the correct analysis is likely to be that the payment constitutes third party consideration for the supply.’
Lord Hope said: ‘I think that Lord Millett went too far [above] when he said that the question to be asked is whether the taxpayer obtained ‘anything – anything at all’ used or to be used for the purposes of his business in return for that payment. Payment for the mere discharge of an obligation owed to a third party will not, as he may be taken to have suggested, give rise to the right to claim a deduction. A case where the taxpayer pays for a service which consists of the supply of goods or services to a third party requires a more careful and sensitive analysis, having regard to the economic realities of the transaction when looked at as a whole.’

Judges:

Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Walker, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath

Citations:

UKSC 2009/0154, [2013] UKSC 15, [2013] STI 591, [2013] 2 CMLR 51, [2013] 2 All ER 719, [2013] BVC 67, UKSC 2009/0154

Links:

Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC, Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 77/388/EEC 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At VDT – Loyalty Management UK Ltd v Customs and Excise VDT 6-Apr-2005
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – the Appellant operates the Nectar programme under which customers who purchase goods (called primary goods) from certain retailers receive points which they may use to acquire . .
At ChD – 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 – 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 . .
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 – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Plantiflor Limited HL 25-Jul-2002
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 . .
Cited – Kuwait Petroleum (GB) Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 27-Apr-1999
‘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 . .
ECJ Preliminary Ruling – Loyalty Management UK (Taxation) ECJ 7-Oct-2010
ECJ (prelimiary ruling) Sixth VAT Directive – Taxable amount – Sales promotion scheme – Loyalty rewards scheme allowing customers to earn points from traders and to redeem them for loyalty rewards – Payments made . .
Cited – AC-ATEL Electronics v Hauptzollamt Munchen-Mitte ECJ 2-Jun-1994
ECJ 1. Preliminary rulings – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Jurisdiction of the national court – Determination and assessment of the facts of the dispute – Need for a preliminary ruling and relevance of the . .
ECJ – Loyalty Management UK (Taxation) ECJ 7-Oct-2010
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Taxable amount – Sales promotion scheme – Loyalty rewards scheme allowing customers to earn points from traders and to redeem them for loyalty rewards – Payments made by the operator of . .

Cited by:

See Also – Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd SC 20-Jun-2013
Decisions about the application of the VAT system are highly dependent upon the factual situations involved. The case-law of the Court of Justice indicates that, when determining the relevant supply in which a taxable person engages, regard must be . .
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 – 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, . .
Cited – Amoena (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 13-Jul-2016
The court considered the proper classification under customs codes for a mastectomy bra. The First Tier Tribunal had found no evidence that it had an medical purpose beyond the containment of the breast from.
Held: The appeal succeeded.
Cited – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency SC 3-Apr-2019
The parties disputed the classification and labelling of mechanically separated meats (‘MSM’) under EU law. The ECJ had imposed a moratorium on certain products. Newby challenged that unsuccessfully, but now Newby appealed to the Supreme Court on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.471644

Wakefield College v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Jan 2011

VAT – zero rate – construction of a building for a charity – business use – yes – appeal dismissed.
VAT – Art 13 of the Common System of VAT Directive – college of further education a body governed by public law – no.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 70 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.442842

Aabsolute Bond Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 26 Oct 2012

VAT – tax warehouse – assessment relating to goods considered to be missing – corresponding excise duty assessment withdrawn as out of time – whether VAT liability affected – no – whether assessment should have been made by reason of allegedly incomplete or incorrect return rather than under s 73(7B) VATA 1994 – no – whether a supply of goods at or before the duty point – held, on facts, goods delivered to warehouse and removed in circumstances constituting supplies – subject to adjustment, assessment confirmed and appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2012] UKFTT 672 (TC), [2013] SFTD 122

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.466190

Orchardcrown Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 28 Sep 2012

VAT – output tax – supply of goods with charge for postage – whether a single supply – whether supplier acts as agent for customer in contracting with Royal Mail – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Plantiflor Ltd considered – single supply by appellant – no agency established – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2012] UKFTT 608 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.466180

Minister Finansow v SAWP: ECJ 18 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Common system of value added tax – Taxable transactions – Concept of ‘supply of services for consideration’ – Payment of fees, in respect of fair compensation, to organisations collectively managing copyright and related rights – Not included

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:22, [2017] EUECJ C-37/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.573257

National Roads Authority v The Revenue Commissioners: ECJ 19 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 13(1), second subparagraph – Activity of managing road infrastructure and making it available on payment of a toll – Activities engaged in by a body governed by public law acting as a public authority – Presence of private operators – Significant distortions of competition – Existence of actual or potential competition

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:28, [2017] EUECJ C-344/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.573252

David Baxendale Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 31 Jul 2009

The court was asked as to the correct VAT treatment to be applied to the sale to members of the public of what is described as the LighterLife weight loss programme. The taxpayer appealed against a finding that services of dietary products and counselling support were in law one supply.
Held: The appeal failed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Patten

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 831, [2009] STI 2348, [2009] BVC 663, [2009] STC 2578

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At FTTTx – David Baxendale Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 30-Jul-2008
VDT VAT – Supply of services – Whether supplied for consideration – Dietary foodpacks supplied together with counselling support, payment made for foodpacks – Whether consideration given for counselling support – . .
At ChD – HM Revenue and Customs v David Baxendale Ltd ChD 5-Feb-2009
The taxpayer provided slimming schemes in two parts, counselling support and supplies of dietary products. The parties disputed the treatement of the services for VAT purposes. The revenue argued there was one service, and the taxpayer that there . .

Cited by:

At CA – 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.

VAT, European, Constitutional

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.368592

Magic Memories Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Dec 2013

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX- supply of photo-books at the visitor attractions – whether supply of goods or services – if supply of goods, whether a supply of photographs or of photo-books – whether photo-books were ‘books or booklets’ within Item 1 of Group 3 of Schedule 8 Value Added Tax Act 1994- appeal allowed

Citations:

[2013] UKFTT 730 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.519632

Martem Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 Oct 2011

VAT – alleged MTIC fraud – whether the Appellant knew or ought to have known that its transactions were connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT- appeal dismissed on basis that the Appellant ought to have known and on the balance of probabilities knew that its transactions were connected with fraud

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 641 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.449621

Thomas Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 10 Oct 2011

VAT – Appeals – Costs – whether Respondents had acted unreasonably in defending or conducting the proceedings – Rule 10(1)(b) – late withdrawal of decision to refuse VAT repayment – Respondents’ approach to matters raised by appeal and conduct in relation to its preparation – absence of agreed basis for withdrawing appeal before hearing – taking into account Respondents’ conduct overall, held they had acted unreasonably and that costs should be awarded against them.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 656 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.449632

Wright and Another v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 27 Oct 2011

VAT – Registration – Whether intending to make taxable supplies – Whether work undertaken to turn a detached property into two dwellings was a conversion, alteration, extension or enlargement of an existing building – If so whether extension or enlargement created an additional dwelling – VATA 1994 schedule 8 Group Note 16 – Whether apportionment possible – Appeal allowed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 681 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.449637

Palmers of Oakham v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 25 Jan 2011

ZERO RATING – construction of a dwelling house and detached garage – time lapse between the two being built – whether garage built ‘at the same time’ as dwelling – VAT Act 1994 Section 30(2); Schedule 8, Group 5, item 2(a) and note (3) – appeal allowed in part

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 82 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.442826

My Secrets Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Jan 2011

VAT – alleged MTIC fraud – whether the Appellant knew or ought to have known that its transactions were connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT- whether HMRC were able to prove that in relation to the relevant transactions there had been a fraudulent evasion of tax

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 72 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.442823

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 professions should be exempt from VAT, but the supply of goods is taxable (though zero rated). In rural areas doctors also filled the role of pharmacist. They sought to argue that the supplies of drugs in that context was taxable, and that they could therefore recover input taxes. The commissioners argued that there was a single exempt supply.
Held: The regulations only allowed doctors to dispense drugs which patients would administer themselves where the special rules applied. There was however no sufficient distinction to have the dispensing treated differently. Comissioners’ appeal allowed.
The classification of the transaction as a supply of services or of goods and services was a question of law.

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
[2004] UKHL 53, Times 26-Nov-2004, [2005] 1 WLR 86, [2005] STC 55
Bailii, House of Lords
Value Added Tax Act 1994
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 20-Dec-2002
The appellants were doctors practicing far from a pharmacy. They themselves administered rather than dispensed drugs direct to their clients under the regulation. They appealed a finding that the supplies were exempt supplies, asserting instead that . .
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 – 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 – 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 . .
Cited – Moyna v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 31-Jul-2003
The appellant had applied for and been refused disability living allowance on the basis of being able to carry out certain cooking tasks.
Held: The purpose of the ‘cooking test’ is not to ascertain whether the applicant can survive, or enjoy a . .
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 by:
Cited – Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 20-Dec-2002
The appellants were doctors practicing far from a pharmacy. They themselves administered rather than dispensed drugs direct to their clients under the regulation. They appealed a finding that the supplies were exempt supplies, asserting instead that . .
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 – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, VAT

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.219869

Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: ChD 2002

Lawrence Collins J
[2002] EWHC 518 Ch
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 20-Dec-2002
The appellants were doctors practicing far from a pharmacy. They themselves administered rather than dispensed drugs direct to their clients under the regulation. They appealed a finding that the supplies were exempt supplies, asserting instead that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Health Professions

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.219914

Revenue and Customs v Fortyseven Park Street Ltd: UTTC 12 Feb 2018

UTTC VAT – exemption for leasing or letting of immovable property – hotel sector exclusion – Article 135(1) and (2), Principal VAT Directive – VATA, Sch 9, Group 1, Item 1 and 1(d) and Note (9) – whether grants of fractional interests in a property were exempt or standard-rated supplies

[2018] UKUT 41 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.604787

Totel Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 20 Dec 2016

Claim that the UK’s VAT prepayments rule infringes European law.

Arden, Irwin, Henderson LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1310, [2016] WLR(D) 689, [2017] BVC 3, [2017] STC 540, [2017] 1 WLR 2313
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Cited by:
At CA – Totel Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 26-Jul-2018
The taxpayer challenged the ‘pay first’ rule under VAT which required them, before challenging a VAT assessment, first to deposit the VAT said to be due under the assessment.
Held: The appeal failed. There had not been shown any true . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572744

Mercedes Benz Italia SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate Direzione Provinciale Roma 3: ECJ 14 Dec 2016

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax – Directive 77/388/EEC – Article 17(5), third subparagraph, point (d) – Scope – Application of a deductible proportion to the value added tax charged on the acquisition of all goods and services used by a taxable person – Incidental transactions – Use of turnover as an indicator

C-378/15, [2016] EUECJ C-378/15
Bailii
European

VAT

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572596

A and B, intervener: Generalbundesanwalt beim Bundesgerichtshof: ECJ 8 Dec 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 56 – Place where services are supplied – Concept of ‘similar rights’ – Transfer of greenhouse gas emission allowances

ECLI:EU:C:2016:933, [2016] EUECJ C-453/15
Bailii
Directive 2006/112/EC
European

VAT

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572315

Stock ’94: ECJ 8 Dec 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Integrated cooperation – Grant of financing and supplies of current assets necessary for agricultural production – Single, complex supply – Distinct and independent supplies – Ancillary supply and principal supply

ECLI:EU:C:2016:936, [2016] EUECJ C-208/15
Bailii
Directive 2006/112/EC
European

VAT

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572324

Hewitt v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 17 Sep 2021

VALUE ADDED TAX – flat-rate scheme for farmers – application for permission to make late appeal against cancellation of certificate – whether refusal of permission to make a late appeal breached principle of effectiveness under EU law – no – appeal dismissed

[2021] UKUT 231 (TCC), [2021] STC 2011, [2021] BVC 515
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.671204

Signum Alfa Sped: ECJ 10 Nov 2016

ECJ (Order) Preliminary reference – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Taxation – tax value added – Directive 2006/112 / EC – Right to deduct – Refusal – Invoice Issuer deemed not to have been the real supplier invoiced services – audit Obligations of the taxable person

ECLI:EU:C:2016:869, [2016] EUECJ C-446/15 – CO
Bailii
European

VAT

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571884

Lothian NHS Health Board v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 28 May 2015

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 evidence insufficient to establish a ‘tolerably acceptable calculation’ – VATA 1994, section 83(1)(c) – Finance Act 2008, section 121 – appeal refused.

[2015] UKUT 264 (TCC), [2015] STC 2221, [2015] BVC 519
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.549095

Commission v France C-40/00: ECJ 14 Jun 2001

(Judgment) Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Article 17(2) and (6) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Reintroduction, after the date of entry into force of the Directive, of a total abolition of the right to deduct VAT charged on diesel used as fuel for vehicles and machines on the purchase of which no VAT is deductible

[2001] EUECJ C-40/00, [2001] ECR I-4539, ECLI:EU:C:2001:338, [2001] STI 939, [2003] BVC 165, [2003] BTC 5109, [2003] STC 390
Bailii
European

VAT

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.162788

Commission v France C-345/99: ECJ 14 Jun 2001

(Judgment) Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Article 17(2) and (6) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Deductibility of tax on the acquisition of vehicles used to carry out taxable transactions – Limitation to vehicles used exclusively for driving instruction

C-345/99, [2001] EUECJ C-345/99, ECLI:EU:C:2001:334, [2001] ECR I-4493, [2003] STC 372, [2003] BTC 5092, [2003] BVC 148
Bailii
European

VAT

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.162773

Odvolaci financni reditelstvi v Bastova: ECJ 10 Nov 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 2(1)(c) – Concept of ‘supply of services for consideration’ – Supply of a horse by a taxable person to the organiser of horse races – Assessment of the consideration – Right to deduct expenses linked to the preparation of the taxable person’s horses for the races – General costs linked to the overall economic activity – Annex III, point 14 – Reduced rate of VAT applicable to the use of sporting facilities – Applicability to the operation of racing stables – Transaction consisting of a single supply or several independent supplies

ECLI:EU:C:2016:855, [2016] EUECJ C-432/15
Bailii
European

VAT

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571263

Paling Plumbing and Heating Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Oct 2016

FTTTx Vat – Penalties : VAT default surcharge – payment made one day late by FPS – no direct debit arrangement in place – Appellant understood he had additional three days to make payment – whether reasonable excuse – no – whether penalty disproportionate – no – appeal dismissed

[2016] UKFTT 697 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570571

Victoria Walk Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Oct 2016

FTTTx Vat – Avoidance : Other – restriction of deduction of input tax under the ‘Kittel’ principle – whether non-payment of VAT by associated company was fraudulent – whether inaccuracy in return was ‘deliberate’ – paragraph 3 Schedule 24 Finance Act 2007 – appeals dismissed

[2016] UKFTT 687 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570578

Evans v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Oct 2016

FTTTx Excise Duty Civil Penalty (See Also Excise Hydrocarbon Oil [Duty]) : Evasion – EXCISE DUTY and CUSTOMS DUTY and IMPORT VAT- civil evasion penalties – s 8 of FA 1994 and s 25 of FA 2003 – the test of dishonesty – the burden of proof – the standard of proof – the status of Tenerife for customs clearance purposes – whether appellant ‘dishonest’; no – appeal allowed – penalty discharged

[2016] UKFTT 683 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes – Other, Customs and Excise, VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570561

Matthews and Another v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 18 Oct 2016

FTTTx Vat – Assessments : Other – option to tax – apportionment – disused public house and flat – Schedule 10 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 – Notice 700/57 – appeal against an apportionment of 90% to commercial and 10% to residential – appeal allowed – substitute apportionment of two thirds commercial and one third residential

[2016] UKFTT 694 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570568

Ireland Generator and Spare Parts Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Oct 2016

FTTTX Vat – Cars : Other – entitlement to credit for input tax on motorcar – Article 7 of VAT (Input Tax) Order 1992 (SI 1992/3222) considered – whether intention to make car available for private use – physical or legal restraint as to private use – no – appeal dismissed

[2016] UKFTT 686 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570566

Prizeflex v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 17 Oct 2016

UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – MTIC – transactions connected with fraud – whether appellant knew or ought to have known that transactions were connected with fraud -whether HMRC’s allegations involved an allegation of dishonesty – whether HMRC’s pleadings were adequate – whether FTT, [2014] UKFTT 963 (TC), dealt appropriately with the allegation – whether evidence of good character of director of appellant admissible – appeal dismissed

[2016] UKUT 436 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570428

ETB (2014) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 30 Sep 2016

UTTC VAT – PENALTIES – appeal against default surcharge – whether reasonable excuse – sections 59(7) and 71(1)(b) VAT Act 1994 – appeal dismissed by First-tier Tribunal – whether First-tier Tribunal erred – decision of First-tier Tribunal set aside and remade – default surcharge upheld

[2016] UKUT 424 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570423

Fairway Lakes Limited v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Jul 2016

UTTC Value added tax – construction of written agreement between the purchaser of a holiday lodge and the taxable person constructing it – whether the agreement imposed an obligation on a third party to grant a lease of the plot of land on which the lodge was constructed – held, upholding the decision of the First-tier Tribunal, that it did – appeal dismissed

[2016] UKUT 340 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570406