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 … Continue reading Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Zielinski Baker and Partners Limited: HL 26 Feb 2004
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 was with in the curtilage as defined in the 1990 Act. Works to the outbuilding therefore … Continue reading Zielinski Baker and Partners Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 12 May 2002
‘Note (1)(a) of Group 6 provides that an essential feature of a protected building is that it is a listed building ‘within the meaning of’ the 1990 Act. A listed building ‘within the meaning of’ the 1990 Act is a building which falls within the extended definition in section 1(5) of the 1990 Act.’ Judges: … Continue reading Zielinski Baker and Partners Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: 2001
The repair of a roof of a listed building was not an alteration despite small changes in appearance. Citations: Ind Summary 03-Jul-1995 Statutes: Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 8 grp 6 item 2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales VAT Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79745
The supply of windows and other building items which were made to measure for protected buildings was a supply of goods and services and so was not zero-rated. Citations: Ind Summary 03-Jul-1995 Statutes: Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 8 grp 6 item 2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales VAT Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79725
VAT – Assessment – Whether supply of transport of passengers or making of arrangements for transport of passengers – Sch 8 Grp 8, Item 4 and Item 10 Value Added Tax Act 1994 – No – Agreement or undertaking to provide transport of passengers – Standard rated – Appeal dismissed Citations:  UKVAT V19386 Links: … Continue reading Thamesdown Transport Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 16 Dec 2005
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 … Continue reading Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 20 Dec 2002
The ‘Local Community’ exemption applied to a village hall despite there being sales from the hall from time to time. Citations: Gazette 03-Apr-1997, Times 28-Mar-1997 Statutes: Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 8 Grp5 4(b) Jurisdiction: England and Wales VAT Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82644
Company selling cards giving discount provided vateable service – not prepayment. Citations: Ind Summary 30-May-1995 Statutes: Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 6 grp 5 Jurisdiction: England and Wales VAT Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79724
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 … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Leightons Ltd; Same v Eye-Tech Opticians: QBD 13 Apr 1995
VALUE ADDED TAX – exempt supplies – supplies by an eligible body of the right of admission to a zoo – one member of Appellant’s Council of Management held a debenture from the Appellant giving the right to repayment and interest which was always . .
The taxpayer appealed a decision that a conversion of a non-residential part of a building used for business and residential purposes was not exempt from VAT.
Held: The building was not within the definition of a self contained residential . .
The Orchestra apealed a finding that it was not entitled to exemption from VAT as a supply by an eligible body of a cultural performance. The taxpayer’s board was voluntary, but the management was employed.
Held: The appeal failed. In order to . .
The court examined arrangements whereby organisations which were not banks, endorsed credit cards to be issued by banks to their members.
Held: The granting of credit was exempt from VAT, and also were exempted negotiations of credit and the . .
The Directive exempted from a charge to VAT for letting of imoveable property. The taxpayer challenged the requirement to charge to VAT his business of leasing pitches for caravans.
Held: The directive allowed member states to derogate from . .
The taxpayer licensed static caravans on seasonal pitches on its land. They claimed exemption from charging VAT on the basis that they were residential lettings exempt under European legislation.
Held: The appeal failed. The legislation . .