Littlewoods Retail Ltd and Others v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Revenue and Customs: ECJ 19 Jul 2012

(Grand Chamber) Second and Sixth VAT Directives – Input tax – Refund of excess – Payment of interest – Procedures
The court considered whether on repayment to a taxpayer of wrongly imposed VAT, the interest returned with the repayment should be on a simple or compound basis.
Held: ‘European Union law must be interpreted as requiring that a taxable person who has overpaid value added tax which was collected by the member state contrary to the requirements of European Union legislation on value added tax has a right to reimbursement of the tax collected in breach of European Union law and to the payment of interest on the amount of the latter. It is for national law to determine, in compliance with the principles of effectiveness and equivalence, whether the principal sum must bear ‘simple interest’, ‘compound interest’ or another type of interest.’
V Skouris, P
[2012] EUECJ C-591/10, ECLI:EU:C:2012:478, [2012] STC 1714
Bailii
European
Citing:
OpinionLittlewoods Retail Ltd and Others v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Revenue and Customs ECJ 12-Jan-2012
Opinion – Reimbursement of VAT collected in breach of EU law – Interest – Simple interest – Compound interest – Procedural autonomy of the Member States – Principle of effectiveness – Principle of equivalence . .

Cited by:
CitedRevenue and Customs v The Investment Trust Companies SC 11-Apr-2017
Certain investment trust companies (ITCs) sought refunds of VAT paid on the supply of investment management services. EU law however clarified that they were not due. Refunds were restricted by the Commissioners both as to the amounts and limitation . .
CitedLittlewoods Ltd and Others v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs SC 1-Nov-2017
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .
CitedTotel 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.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.640867