Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Directive 77/388/EEC – VAT – Article 11(A)(1)(a) – Taxable amount – Subsidy directly linked to the price – Regulation (EC) No 603/95 – Aid granted in the dried fodder sector
C-463/02, [2004] EUECJ C-463/02
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199464
VDT VAT – zero rating – listed building – whether building as a matter of ordinary understanding ‘substantially reconstructed’ within VATA 1994, Sch 8, Grp 6, item 1 – yes – whether further condition in Grp 6, Note (4)(a) satisfied – yes – appeal allowed
[2004] UKVAT V18535
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199204
Appeal against surcharge assessment.
[2004] UKVAT V18682
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199194
Appeal against surcharge. Reasonable Excuse
[2004] UKVAT V18683
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199195
Appeal against surcharge assessment
[2004] UKVAT V18685
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199197
[2004] UKVAT V18684
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199201
VDT Zero-rating – installation in a listed building of a different type of sash windows – whether an approved alteration of a protected building – appeal against standard rating dismissed: VAT 1994 Schedule 8 Group 6 Note 6(c).
[2004] UKVAT V18653
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199176
Reasonable excuse appeal against surcharge.
[2004] UKVAT V18643
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199182
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – reduced rates of tax -energy-saving materials – ‘Wallform’ method of insulating buildings – how far reduced rate applies to contracts for installation – whether separate supplies of materials necessary to benefit from reduction – reduced rate inapplicable to entire contracts – appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18638
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199157
VDT VAT – penalty for dishonest evasion assessed on company – apportioned under s. 61 VATA 1984 to two named officers – appellant one named officer – whether appellant managing officer in part of period covered by penalty assessment – whether conduct giving rise to penalty attributable in part to dishonesty of appellant -appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18640
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199171
Appeal against surcharge assessments
[2004] UKVAT V18634
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199158
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – motor cars – whether recovery of input tax on acquisition blocked – VAT (Input Tax) Order 1992, art 7 – cars kept available for business use 24 hours a day – whether private use effectively excluded – yes – appeal allowed
[2004] UKVAT V18631
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199173
VDT VAT – input tax – fitting out of shop – whether supplies made by shopfitters those of services or of goods – if of services irrecoverable as having been made more than 6 months before appellants registered for VAT – if of goods recoverable – held on facts supplies of goods – appeal allowed.
[2004] UKVAT V18630
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199174
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – avoidance – construction of premises for probable occupation by partially-exempt banking group – series of transactions designed wholly or partly to reduce liability for VAT – assumption that tribunal’s decision in Halifax plc correct – whether transactions artificial – whether tax avoidance sole purpose
VALUE ADDED TAX – Sixth Directive arts 17, 19, 20 – VAT Regulations 1995, reg 101 – residual input tax – intention to make future taxable and exempt supplies – fixity of intention – whether necessary for application of reg 101(2)(d) – effect of change of intention – whether absence of demonstrable intention to make identifiable taxable supply renders reg 101(2)(d) inapplicable
VALUE ADDED TAX – building – meaning – VATA Sch 9 Group 1 – whether new construction attached to existing structure by link bridge with shared services and used for same purposes to be regarded as a ‘building’ in its own right or merely an extension of the original building – whether Sch 8 Group 5 Note (16) concepts relevant – Sixth Directive art 4(3)
[2004] UKVAT V18642
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199159
VDT ZERO RATING – work on a listed building – whether an approved alteration -whether needing approval – whether sufficiently extensive to qualify as an alteration – remaining relevance of Viva Gas – appeal allowed.
[2004] UKVAT V18660
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199177
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – assessment – take-away restaurant – delivery service – observations of customers – cashing-up exercise – whether suppression of sales demonstrated – yes- whether apparent discrepancies accounted for by advertising exercise – no – assessment reduced in part
VALUE ADDED TAX- penalty for dishonest evasion – whether sales suppressed – yes – whether dishonesty established – yes – penalty reduced to reflect reduction in assessment – mitigation- no additional reduction
[2004] UK V18674
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199180
VDT Value Added Tax – Section 73(1) VATA 1994 – assessment made to best judgment – method of calculating under-declared VAT – whether method used by Commissioners was so unreasonable that resulting assessment was not made to the best of their judgment – no – whether additional factors not made known by Appellant to Commissioners should be taken into account so as to reduce the assessment – yes – appeal dismissed – directions to reduce the assessment
[2004] UKVAT V18664
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199169
Default Surcharges: Late admission of appeal allowed. Appeals dismissed.
[2004] UKVAT V18659
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199187
VDT VAT – Default interest – Assessment reduced on appeal – Interest reduced accordingly – Musashi [2004] STC 220 distinguished – VATA 1994 s.74
VAT – Repeated misdeclaration penalty – Requirement for penalty liability notice – VATA 1994 s.64
[2004] UKVAT V18639
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199183
VDT VAT – CONSTRUCTION – Time of supply – Obligations under construction agreement discharged before work completed – Lease assigned to developer – Whether assignment ‘payment’ – Amount of payment – Whether work ‘performed’ by reason of discharge – Parties connected – Open market direction under VATA 1994 Sch 6, para 1 – VAT Regs 1995 reg 93 – Appeal allowed in part
[2004] UKVAT V18689
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199191
VDT EXEMPT SUPPLIES – Finance – Credit and debit cards – Appellant accepting remote cinema bookings for Odeon – Customers paying by card – Appellant charged 50 pence per ticket to customers – Extent of services to customers – Whether card handling services exempt – Whether any dealing with money – Whether intermediary services supplied in intermediary capacity – Whether ‘distinct act of mediation’ – VATA 1994, Sch 9, Grp 5, item 1, 5 Note (5) – EEC Sixth Directive Art 13B(a)(1)-(4) – Appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18626
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199120
VDT Assessment under s73(1) VATA – No appearance by the Appellant or representative at the hearing – Appeal considered in the absence of the Appellant – Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution – Rule 18(2) VAT Tribunals Rules 1986 applied.
[2004] UKVAT V18593
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199116
VALUE ADDED TAX – EXEMPTION – health and welfare – outsourced medical care (renal dialysis) – exempt or standard rated – held exempt.
[2004] UKVAT V18588
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199128
Reasonable excuse appeal.
[2004] UKVAT V18611
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199130
VAT – consideration – discounts – whether prompt payment discounts reduce the taxable amount where the discount is not achieved – para 4(1) Sch 6 VAT Act – tour operators – whether package price reduced by prompt payment discounts where not achieved.
[2004] UKVAT V18591
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199145
Default surcharge: Ground of Appeal – Misdirection by National Vat Helpline: No substantive ground: No substantive evidence: Appeal dismissed.
[2004] UKVAT V18584
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199139
Default Surcharge: Appellant’s enquiries after due date. No discretion invested in Debt Management officer. Appeal dismissed.
[2004] UKVAT V18597
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199136
VDT CUSTOMS DUTY – Relief – Vehicle for use by handicapped person – Motor home adapted for use by person using wheel-chair – Vehicle fitted with ramps, stowage for ramps, floor track – Whether ‘specially designed for the social advancement’ of physically handicapped person – Yes – Reg 918/83/EEC Art 72.1, 72.2
ZERO RATING – Import of vehicle for use by handicapped person who usually uses a wheel-chair – Vehicle fitted with ramps etc – Whether vehicle ‘substantially and permanently adapted for carriage of a person in a wheel-chair’ – Yes – VATA 1994 Sch 8, Gp 12, Items 2, 2A, Note 5L
[2004] UKVAT V18560
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199092
DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Reasonable excuse – Cashflow problems – Appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18586
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199126
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – dishonest evasion – VATA s 60 – appellant paying six successive centrally-issued assessments for less than the true liability – inadequate attempts to put accounting records in order – whether ‘dishonest’ – yes – appeal dismissed but reduction for mitigation increased
Colin Bishopp C
[2004] UKVAT V18563
Cited – Regina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
Cited – Gandhi Tandoori Restaurant v Customs and Excise Commissioners VDT 1989
The court considered the use of R v Ghosh when considering whether dishonesty had been established under section 13 of the 1983 Act, saying: ‘It is to be observed that in section 13(1) the first requirement for liability to a penalty is that the . .
Cited – Regina v Dealy CACD 13-Dec-1994
Evasion of VAT does not require proof of intent to permanently deprive, ‘evasion’ can consist in a deferment, rather than permanent evasion, of a liability. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199117
VDT DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Reasonable excuse – Cheque wrongly made out – Genuine mistake – Not a reasonable excuse – VATA 1994 s71(1)(b) – Appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18615
Value Added Taxes Act 1994 71(1)(b)
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199124
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2004] UKVAT V18589
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199142
DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Reasonable excuse – Cash shortage caused by mismanagement of construction contract on part of Appellant – Incapacity through illness of chief executive – Whether reasonable foresight and due diligence would have prevented the insufficiency of funds – No – Appeal allowed
[2004] UKVAT V18587
England and Wales
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199125
VDT Vat – payment of two outstanding debts (Vat inclusive) of another company by Appellant – claimed the Vat as input tax – no transfer of intellectual property or other rights from the debtor company – not within s.24 VATA – no invoices under Reg.29 Vat Regulations 1995 – Appeal dismissed.
[2004] UKVAT V18600
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199118
VDT EXEMPTION – Medical care – Services provided by medical practitioner – Whether exempt as being provision of medical care – Application of decision of ECJ following reference in this matter – Sixth Directive art 13A.1(c)
[2004] UKVAT V18581
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199071
ASSESSMENT – restaurant – underdeclared takings – were the assessments excessive – subject to a very minor amendment, no – appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18562
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199091
Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Latham Lord Justice Neuberger
[2004] EWCA Civ 559, [2004] STC 1081, [2004] BVC 485, [2004] BTC 5425,, [2004] STI 1202
England and Wales
At ChD – WHA Ltd and Another v Customs and Excise ChD 28-Feb-2003
The taxpayer appealed against a finding that it was unable to recover input VAT in its transactions. A scheme had been devised for the processing of claims and repairs in motor vehicle accidents.
Held: (1) WHA could treat the VAT payable on . .
At CA – WHA Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 17-Jul-2007
The court considered the European principle of abuse of right.
Held: Lord Neuberger, delivering the leading judgment rejected the submission that the court was confined to considering the artificiality or purpose of each individual step, since . .
At CA – WHA Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 1-May-2013
The Court was asked as to the effectiveness of a scheme, known as Project C, designed to minimise the overall liability to VAT of a group of companies involved in motor breakdown insurance.
Held: The court dismissed WHA’s appeal. There had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196775
(Judgment) Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Article 17 of the Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC – Deduction of input tax – Amendment of national legislation withdrawing the right to opt for taxation of lettings of immovable property – Adjustment of deductions – Application to current leases
C-487/01, [2004] EUECJ C-487/01, [2004] ECR I-5337, [2007] STC 776, [2006] BVC 740, [2006] BTC 5670
European
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196662
VALUE ADDED TAX – bad debt relief – s 36 VATA 1994, reg 168 VAT Regulations 1995, Articles 73 and 90 Principal VAT Directive – factoring services – when is the consideration received – requirement in reg 168 for a ‘refunds for bad debts account’
[2020] UKUT 357 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.657041
VDT ASSESSMENT – some invoices issued after de-registration disallowed for input tax – other invoices accepted as representing valid input tax
CIVIL EVASION PENALTY – insufficient proof to infer dishonesty – appeal allowed
[2004] UKVAT V18547
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195942
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2004] UKVAT V18548
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195941
VDT EXEMPTION – Medical care – Services provided by medical practitioner – Whether exempt as being provision of medical care – Application of decision of ECJ following reference in this matter – Sixth Directive art 13A.1(c)
[2004] UKVAT V18551
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195937
VDT VAT – Default surcharge – s.59 VATA 1994 – Whether a reasonable excuse was shown – Misdirection by an officer relied on by the Appellant, to the effect that a late payment of VAT in specified circumstances would not attract a surcharge – Finding that no misdirection established – Held no reasonable excuse shown – appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18546
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195938
Reasonable excuse appeal
[2004] UKVAT V18549
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195936
VDT Registration – whether appellant had exceeded registration limits -question whether trader had suppressed profits – trader acknowledged that profits had been suppressed but argued these did not result in registration levels being attained – best judgement assessment resulted in registration and assessment to VAT – was assessment to best judgement – yes – question as to quantum – tribunal disagreed with formula adopted and requested Respondents to recalculate adopting a different method – appeal allowed as to quantum – no decision about registration which will turn on revised figures -hearing adjourned for figures to be agreed between the parties – parties to apply for re listing before the same chairman and member if they fail to agree upon the revised figures
[2004] UKVAT V18550
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195943
VAT penalties
[2004] UKVAT V18544
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195328
Penalties – default surcharge
[2004] UKVAT V18473
England and Wales
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195298
VAT Assessment – best judgment
[2004] UKVAT V18542
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195323
VAT Penalties – default surcharge
Richard Barlow
[2004] UKVAT V18454
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195274
[2004] UKVAT V18476
England and Wales
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195309
VAT Supply
[2004] UKVAT V18472
England and Wales
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195297
VAT Repayments
[2004] UKVAT V18474
England and Wales
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195310
VAT penalties – default surcharge
[2004] UKVAT V18485
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195314
VAT penalties – default surcharge
[2004] UKVAT V18487
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195291
Penalties, default surcharge
[2004] UKVAT V18477
England and Wales
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195313
Vat Penalties – default surcharge
[2004] UKVAT V18543
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195332
The taxpayers said that the Commissioners’ assessment to VAT was out of time, and appealed a finding that it was not. They said that time should run from the point at which the Commissioners knew the facts upon which the assessment was based. The Commissioners argued that time could not begin to run until the decision in the case of Primback upon which the assessment was based.
Held: The decision of a court did not count as ‘facts’ for limitation purposes. Use of the phrase ‘evidence of facts’ emphasised that interpretation. The assessments were out of time.
Lord Justice May The Hon Mr Justice Parker Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr
[2004] EWCA Civ 243, Times 19-Mar-2004, Gazette 08-Apr-2004
Value Added Tax Act 1994 78A(2) 80(4A)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v DFS Furniture Company Plc ChD 16-Apr-2003
The Commissioners had been ordered to repay VAT to the taxpayer. A subsequent decision of the ECJ meant that the sum should have been repaid to the Commissioners. The taxpayer now alleged that the commissioners were out of the two year maximum time . .
Cited – Regina v Commissioners of Customs and Excise, ex Parte Kay and Co; Regina v Same, ex Parte Similar CA 10-Dec-1996
The commissioners had no power to impose time limits on retrospective refund claims. . .
Cited – Primback Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 15-May-2001
A company made arrangements for finance for its customers to purchase products at an apparent zero rate of interest. In fact the finance company deducted an undisclosed commission before forwarding payment to the shop. The shop wanted to pay VAT . .
Cited – 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 – Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council etc HL 29-Jul-1998
Right of Recovery of Money Paid under Mistake
Kleinwort Benson had made payments to a local authority under swap agreements which were thought to be legally enforceable when made. Subsequently, a decision of the House of Lords, (Hazell v. Hammersmith and Fulham) established that such swap . .
Cited – 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.
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.194584
The commissioners sought to charge to VAT charges for works which had been carried out to a building within the curtilage of a listed building. The taxpayer sought zero-rating.
Held: The outbuilding to which alterations were made must have been a ‘protected building’. Note (1) defines a protected building as both ‘a building which is designed to remain as or become a dwelling house’ and it must be a ‘listed building, within the meaning of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990’. Since the new building would not be a dwelling, the claim failed the first test, and the works were not zero-rated (Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead dissenting).
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[2004] BTC 5249, [2004] 1 WLR 707, [2004] STI 502, [2004] STC 456, [2004] 10 EGCS 185, [2004] 2 All ER 141, [2004] BVC 309, [2004] UKHL 7, Times 27-Feb-2004, Gazette 25-Mar-2004
Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 8 Grp 6, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
England and Wales
Appeal from – Zielinski Baker and Partners Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 12-May-2002
Taxpayers sought exemption from VAT for works to a building. The commissioners claimed that the main building was not a dwelling, and that therefore the outbuilding would not be exempt.
Held: The main building was listed, and the outbuilding . .
Cited – Debenhams Plc v Westminster City Council HL 1987
The extended definition of ‘listed building’ in section 54(9) applied equally for the purposes of paragraph 2(c) of Schedule 1 of the 1967 Act. No rates were to be payable in respect of a hereditament for any period during which it was included in a . .
Cited – Commission v United Kingdom ECJ 21-Jun-1988
Europa An action by the Commission pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty against a Member State for failure to fulfil its obligations, the bringing of which is a matter for the Commission in its entire . .
Cited – Shimizu (UK) Ltd v Westminster City Council HL 11-Feb-1997
The removal of a listed building’s chimney stacks was an alteration allowing a claim for compensation. The phrases ‘alteration’ and ‘demolition’ are mutually exclusive. Although part of a building may be a listed building, a part of a listed . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and Another v Skerritts of Nottingham Ltd CA 25-Feb-2000
The meaning of ‘curtilage’ whilst not strictly a term of art had caused considerable difficulties. There was nothing inherent in the concept to imply any limitation that the area should be small. In this case the curtilage of a manor house could . .
Cited – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Viva Gas Appliances Limited HL 1983
Any work on the fabric of a building constituted its alteration ‘except that which is so slight or trivial as to attract the application of the de minimis rule’. The word ‘demolition’ meant destroying the building as a whole. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.193888
The vendor sold computers to the defendant, intending not to account to the commissioners for the VAT. The seller went into liquidation, and the liquidator sought payment. The purchaser had been unaware of the intended fraud and resisted payment.
Held: The fraud did not make the contract unenforcable by the liquidator. The fraudulent intent was too far removed from the substance of the contract to taint it. Money received by a seller would not be held in trust for the Commissioners, and use of the money for other purposes did not conflict wit the tax payers duty later to account for an equivalent sum. The contract itself was lawful.
Mr Justice Field
[2004] EWHC 231 (QB), Times 27-Feb-2004, Gazette 25-Mar-2004, [2004] BVC 779, [2004] 2 Lloyds Rep 92, [2004] STC 1535, [2004] STI 497, [2004] BTC 5720
England and Wales
Cited – Holman v Johnson 5-Jul-1775
ex turpi causa non oritur actio
A claim was made for the price of goods which the plaintiff sold to the defendant in Dunkirk, knowing that the defendant’s purpose was to smuggle the goods into England. The plaintiff was met with a defence of illegality.
Held: The defence . .
Cited – Tinsley v Milligan HL 28-Jun-1993
Two women parties used funds generated by a joint business venture to buy a house in which they lived together. It was vested in the sole name of the plaintiff but on the understanding that they were joint beneficial owners. The purpose of the . .
Cited – Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Limited CA 23-May-2000
The fact that an employment contract was tainted with illegality of which the employee was aware, did not deprive the employee of the possibility of claiming rights which were due to her under a statute which created rights associated with but not . .
Cited – Skilton v Sullivan CA 18-Mar-1994
The seller of a quantity of Koi carp sent the buyer an invoice for trout. The supply of Koi carp is chargeable to VAT but the supply of trout is not. When the seller sued for the price, he was met with a plea that the contract was illegal as being a . .
Cited – Miller v Karlinski CA 1945
It was too plain for argument that a contract of employment under which the employee was paid a salary and also ‘expenses’ that included the income tax payable on the salary was against public policy and therefore unenforceable. . .
Cited – Napier v National Business Agency Ltd CA 1951
The plaintiff sought to sue for wrongful dismissal on a contract of employment under which he was paid andpound;13 salary per week and andpound;6 ‘expenses’, when his expenses could never exceed andpound;1 per week.
Held: The parties had made . .
Cited – St John Shipping Corporation v Joseph Rank Limited 1956
The defendants held a bill of lading for part of the cargo carried on the plaintiffs’ vessel from Mobile, Alabama, to Birkenhead. The vessel was over laden and the plaintiffs were guilty of an offence under the 1932 Act. The defendants relied on the . .
Cited – Pearce v Brooks 1866
The contract was for the hire of an ornamental brougham to a prostitute which was supplied with knowledge that it would be used ‘as part of her display’. She returned it in a damaged condition, and refused to make any payments under the contract as . .
Cited – Scott v Brown, Doering, McNab and Co 1892
The plaintiff sought rescission of a contract for the purchase of shares, but failed because the contract had been entered into with the sole object of rigging the market by inducing the public to believe that there was a real market for the shares . .
Cited – Alexander v Rayson CA 1936
The action was for arrears of rent. The evidence at trial was that the plaintiff granted a lease to the defendant at a rent of andpound;1200 and contracted that certain services in connection with the flat would be performed. The plaintiff sent the . .
Cited – Kearley v Thompson 1890
The plaintiff could claim a locus poenitentiae on the grounds of repentance because its confession to the fraud was the result of the frustration by others of its fraudulent purpose. Recovery under a contract performed unlawfully was barred once it . .
Cited – SQ v RQ and Another FD 31-Jul-2008
The home in which the family had lived was held in the name of a brother. Each party claimed that it was held in trust for them. Chancery proceedings had been consolidated into these ancillary relief applications. The home had been in the husband’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.193579
The Hon Mr Justice Evans-Lombe
[2004] EWHC 152 (Ch), [2004] STC 772
England and Wales
Appealed to – 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 . .
Appeal from – 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.
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192661
‘whether late paid fees for membership of a health and fitness club are properly to be regarded as the consideration for a supply of services for VAT purposes, or whether they are, instead, damages or compensation for breach of contract.2
Lord Justice Vos
[2014] EWCA Civ 155, [2014] STI 741, [2014] STC 1548, [2014] BVC 28
England and Wales
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.526262
Appeal against closure notice and amendment to self assessment
[2010] UKFTT 515 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.426609
(2002) VAT Decision 17622
England and Wales
Tribunal Decision – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.231259
The Hon Mr Justice Ferris
[2003] EWHC 3176 (Ch)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Telewest Communications Plc Telewest (Publications) Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 10-Feb-2005
The taxpayers sold cable services which were liable to VAT through 28 subsidiaries, and supplied by a third party as part of the same service a listings magazine. They sought exemption from VAT for that part of the consideration related to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189918
The taxpayer appealed aganst rejection of his objection to an assessment to VAT
Brooke, Chadwick, LJJ, Bodey J
[2002] EWCA Civ 1881, [2003] STC 150
Value Added Tax Regulations 1995, Value Added Tax Act 1994 1 4 73(1)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Rahman T/A Khayam Restaurant v Commissioner of Customs and Excise Admn 11-Jun-1998
The court described the existing practice for a tribunal to look at a challenge to an assessment to VAT which was that the Tribunal should adopt a ‘two stage approach’: ‘ the practice is to consider these cases in two stages: (1) consideration . .
Cited – Van Boeckel v Customs and Excise Commissioners 1981
The court explained the meaning of the requirement that a tax assessment made by the Commissioners should be the ‘best of their judgment’: ‘the Tribunal should not treat an assessment as invalid merely because they disagree as to how the judgment . .
Cited – Pegasus Birds Ltd v Commissioners of HM Customs and Excise CA 27-Jul-2004
The taxpayer complained that the assessment imposed by the Commissioners was wholly unreasonable, and void. The tribunal had found the assessment wholly unreasonable, but the High Court had allowed the Commissioners’ appeal.
Held: There was no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189021
[2003] EWCA Civ 1738
England and Wales
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188490
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13A(1)(f) and 13B(a) – Exemption for services performed by independent groups not likely to give rise to distortions of competition – Exemption for insurance transactions and related services performed by insurance brokers and insurance agents – Assessments of damage caused to motor vehicles carried out by an association on behalf of insurance companies which are members of that association.
C-8/01, [2003] EUECJ C-8/01
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188467
Mr Justice Lawrence Collins
[2003] EWHC 2766 (Ch)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Local Authorities Mutual Investment Trust v Customs and Excise VDT 27-Jan-2003
. .
Appealed to – Local Authorities Mutual Investment Trust v Customs and Excise VDT 27-Jan-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188102
ECJ VAT – Article 13A(1)(b) and (c) of the Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC – Exemption – Psychotherapeutic treatment given in an out-patient facility provided by a foundation governed by private law (charitable establishment) employing qualified psychologists who are not doctors – Direct effect
C-45/01, [2003] EUECJ C-45/01
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187773
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 21(1)(c) – Persons liable to tax – Person mentioning the tax on an invoice – Tax paid in error by a non-taxable person and included in the invoice established by that person
C-78/02, [2003] EUECJ C-78/02
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187782
The company sought to reclaim overpaid VAT.
Held: If the UK government had failed properly to implement the directive, then a person affected had the right to claim the benefit of direct enforceability. However, the directive itself was neither clear nor precise, and therefore it could not benefit from direct applicability.
Lord Justice Auld Lord Justice Chadwick Mr Justice Newman
[2003] EWCA Civ 1448, Times 27-Oct-2003, [2004] STC 1, [2004] BTC 5091, [2004] BVC 151, [2003] STI 1848, [2004] Eu LR 170, [2004] 1 CMLR 8
England and Wales
Appeal from – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 28-Jul-2005
The claimant had sought repayment of overpaid VAT, and the respondent resisted arguing that this would be an unjust enrichment. A reference to the European Court was sought.
Held: It was not possible to say that the House’s opinion was acte . .
Appeal from – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 4-Feb-2009
The taxpayer requested refund of VAT overpaid on chocolate covered cakes. The CandE resisted saying that the money had been substantially already paid by its customers. The case had been referred twice to the ECJ, who answered that the maintenance . .
At CA – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 12-Jul-2006
Question referred to ECJ. Five questions were referred. . .
At CA – Marks and Spencer v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 13-Dec-2007
ECJ Value added tax – Derogation under Article 28 of Directive 77/388 – Principle of neutrality Principle of equal treatment Right to obtain a refund of the tax in the event of incorrect interpretation of . .
At CA – Marks and Spencer v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 10-Apr-2008
(Third Chamber of the Court of Justice) Taxation Sixth VAT Directive Exemption with refund of tax paid at the preceding stage Erroneous taxation at the standard rate Right to zero rate Entitlement to refund Direct effect General principles of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187066
The taxpayer had a loyalty scheme under which they issued vouchers to shoppers who had purchased goods to a certain value. They sought to deduct the sums when accounting for VAT.
Held: Upon earning 150 loyalty points in a quarter, vouchers were given to customers, and there were other schemes. The entire cycle of transactions was to be considered objectively without regard to what the customer thought was being purchased. Para 5 had effect where there was a grant for a consideration of a right to receive goods for an amount stated on a voucher quantifying that right. The paragraph could not apply without a token, but a token did not guarantee its applicability. The issue of a voucher was a separate procedure from the original purchases, and the customer had not purchased the voucher. The paragraph did not apply. The existence of consideration under English law may not suffice to show consideration for the purposes of European VAT law.
Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Latham And Lord Justice Jonathan Parker
[2003] EWCA Civ 1367, Times 16-Oct-2003, Gazette 06-Nov-2003, [2003] STC 1561
Value Added Tax Act 1994 S-6 P-5
England and Wales
Appeal from – Tesco plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 2002
. .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Debenhams Retail Plc CA 18-Jul-2005
The store introduced a system whereby when a customer paid by credit card, the charges made to them for card handling were expressed as a separate amount on the receipt. The store then said that VAT was payable only on the net amount allocated to . .
Cited – Pendragon Plc and Others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 23-Jul-2013
The Revenue had imposed a penalty on the appellants saying that their arrangement for the sale and VAT taxation of demonstrator cars was, in European law terms. The taxpayer sought re-instatment of the First Tier Tribunal judgment in its favour.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186822
reasonable excuse appeal
[2007] UKVAT V20443
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.262534
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 claimants under regulation 109 to reclaim the VAT it had itself paid before that change.
Held: The grant of an interest in land was zero rated unless the Landlord elected to waive exemption. That exemption not having been chosen, the head landlord had charged VAT on its rents. Regulation 109 required an intention to use the inputs in order itself to make a supply of taxable sub-leases, and the change had to relate to specific goods or services. If the letting was seen as a single supply, then the change would be about the entire supply, and the tax payer would succeed. If the lease was a successive series of supplies, the change could only apply to the periods directly affected, and not any earlier period. The second way wa sthe apporach adopted by the regulations generally. The supply of an exempt service and of a non-exempt service should in any event be seen as separate supplies. (Woolf and Walker dissenting)
Lord Steyn, Lord Woolf, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Clyde, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Times 26-May-2003, [2003] UKHL 29, [2003] 1 WLR 1387, [2003] 23 EGCS 134, [2003] STI 1013, [2003] STC 832, [2003] 2 All ER 1073, [2003] BTC 5285, [2003] BVC 341
Value Added Tax Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/2518) 109, Sixth Directive 17(1)
Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group Plc CA 9-Oct-2001
The respondent sought to deduct input tax from income it received from lettings. It had previously occupied the buildings itself making exempt supplies, but then let them. They later waved their exemption, and sought to deduct input tax for periods . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Abbey National Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 22-Feb-2001
Where a part or whole of a business was sold as a going concern, not all the VAT on the expenses of the sale was to be set off against VAT. The entire amount of VAT could only be set off where the assets sold were sold as a properly identifiable . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Thorn Materials Supply Limited and Thorn Resources Limited HL 18-Jun-1998
When goods were purchased for resale to another company within the same VAT group but the purchasing company left that group before delivery, the entire transaction became a vatable supply. If there is an advance payment of less than the whole . .
Cited – Rompelman v Minister van Financien (Judgment) ECJ 14-Feb-1985
A trader who decided to acquire property for letting could claim repayment of VAT on the cost of a right to acquire a building which had not yet been constructed, let alone tenanted. . .
Cited – Belgische Staat v Ghent Coal Terminal (Judgment) ECJ 15-Jan-1998
Once a right of deduction had been exercised because the inputs were for the purpose of investment work intended to be used in connection with taxable transactions, the authorities may not claim repayment merely because the taxpayer has been unable . .
Cited – Finanzamt Goslar v Breitshol (Judgment) ECJ 8-Jun-2000
. .
Cited – Midland Bank plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners ECJ 8-Jun-2000
If there is a clear and direct link between the purchase of goods and their use in output transactions on which VAT was payable, input tax was deductible even if VAT was not deductible in respect of all the supplies. Where the link is indirect than . .
Appealed to – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group Plc CA 9-Oct-2001
The respondent sought to deduct input tax from income it received from lettings. It had previously occupied the buildings itself making exempt supplies, but then let them. They later waved their exemption, and sought to deduct input tax for periods . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182480
The defendant concert promoter appealed against a conviction for evading VAT. He had employed a solo performer but failed to account for VAT on his fees.
Held: The intent of the directive was to allow exemption of cultural workers. An individual performer could be counted as a ‘body’ within the directive and have exemption. Appeal allowed.
C-144/00, Times 17-Apr-2003, [2003] EUECJ C-144/00
Sixth Council Directive 77/338/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of turnover taxes
European
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180809
The taxpayers were motor traders. On agreeing a sale package with a customer, they issued to the customer a voucher worth more than the agreed trade-in value, to be used as credit against the purchase from the taxpayer. They also gave customers MOT vouchers. At first instance, the judge held that neither voucher increased VAT liability, which was to be assessed only on the money paid by the customer plus the agreed trade-in value. The commissioners appealed.
Held: The appeal was allowed in part. Though the monetary equivalent attributable to the agreed part exchange was the value to be attributed towards the replacement, the ‘purchase-plus’ vouchers provided an over-allowance for the trade-in vehicle and, to calculate the VAT chargeable, had no monetary value and did not increase the consideration paid to the taxpayers for their supply. The MOT vouchers were not granted to a customer for a consideration to which the Act applied and the consideration on which VAT was payable was increased by the value of the vouchers.
Ward Chadwick Arden LJJ
[2003] EWCA Civ 130, Gazette 03-Apr-2003, Times 17-Jun-2003, [2003] STC 396
Value Added Tax Act 1994 19 Grp6
England and Wales
Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Hartwell Plc QBD 2002
Motor traders gave customers a voucher to be set off against the cost of a replacement car and other services.
Held: Patten J said: ‘The Purchase Plus allowance is negotiated and agreed as a reduction by Hartwell in the amount which the . .
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180717
FTTTx Default surcharge – payment one day late – Faster Payment Service – incorrect advice from bank as to daily limit – s71(1)(a) VATA 1994 – reasonable excuse – appeal dismissed
[2013] UKFTT 528 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.516878
FTTTx Value Added Tax – Input tax – Disallowance of input tax on basis MTIC fraud – Appellant knew or ought to have known trade connected with fraud – Whether legitimate expectation input tax would be repaid on basis due diligence said by HMRC to be adequate – No – Appeal dismissed
[2011] UKFTT 265 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.443007
VAT – default surcharge – whether penalties proportionate – yes – whether reasonable excuse – appeal allowed in part
[2014] UKFTT 315 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.525377
FTTTx VAT – regulations requiring online filing of VAT return and electronic payment of VAT – whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider in respect of online filing (a) HMRC’s alleged failure to exercise discretion or (b) lawfulness of regulations – whether tribunal had jurisdiction to consider consequential liability to make electronic payment – whether online filing regulations (a) a breach of the human rights of old or disabled people (b) a breach of EU law as disproportionate (c) a breach of human rights as requiring taxpayer to use (allegedly) unsafe means of payment – appeals of first three appellants allowed – fourth appellant’s appeal dismissed
[2013] UKFTT 522 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.516876
FTTTx Appeal against HMRC’s decision that the Appellant’s building supplies were standard rated and not zero-rated because at the time the relevant supplies were made the building did not comply with the condition in Note 2(d) to Group 5 of Schedule 8 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 case dismissed
[2011] UKFTT 150 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.442904
FTTTx VAT – appeals – application for allocation as Complex case – appeal made to VAT and Duties Tribunal – whether this tribunal empowered to make allocation – exercise of discretion under transitional provisions – in light of nature of appeal, decision to direct allocation as Complex case – further decision to refer case to President for consideration for transfer to Upper Tribunal
[2011] UKFTT 341 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.442909
FTTTx VAT – private use of yacht – whether Lennartz principle was applied – yes – calculation of the cost of private use – whether private use charge can be zero-rated or outside the scope of VAT — no
[2011] UKFTT 140 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.442878
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Letting of immovable property – Prefabricated building which can be dismantled and reassembled
C-315/00, [2003] EUECJ C-315/00, [2003] ECR I-563
Cited – Holmwood House School Development v Customs and Excise VDT 12-May-2003
VDT EXEMPTION – school granting peppercorn lease of site for proposed new building – lessee and constructor of school building entering into two licences to school and to associated partnership – whether exempt . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178720
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 they were zero-rated. The NHS refused to make an allowance against VAT paid on drugs supplied to regulation 20 patients.
Held: The judge had viewed the issue as one of fact. That was incorrect. The aim of the patient was to be diagnosed and then to receive treatment. In a general sense that was one supply, but in the context of this question, that was the wrong level of generality. Here there were two supplies, and the supply of the drug was zero-rated.
Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Chadwick Mr Justice Munby
Times 15-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1870
National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 662) 20, Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch8 Grp12 1A
England and Wales
Appeal from – Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 2002
. .
Cited – Beynon and Partners v Customs and Excise HL 25-Nov-2004
The House asked whether the personal administration of a drug such as a vaccine by an NHS doctor to a patient is a taxable supply for the purposes of value added tax. The provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical . .
Appeal from – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178546