British Printing Industries Federation v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 Feb 2014

FTTTx VAT – exempt services – Value Added Tax Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 9, item 1(d), note (5) and Article 132(1)(l) of the Principal VAT Directive (2006/112/EC) – employers federation providing services to members in return for annual subscriptions – whether membership subscriptions exempt from VAT – whether ‘trade union’ association – whether primary purpose of federation included making representations to third party decision makers – whether objectives of association were for the collective interests of members

[2014] UKFTT 150 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521774

Helianthus (London) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Jan 2014

PROCEDURE – Permission to extend time to appeal- VAT security dispute – factors from UT decision in Data Select [2012] UKUT 187 (TCC) applied – whether extra prejudice to HMRC where delay arose in VAT security appeals – no – taking account of appellant’s explanation, length of delay, purpose of time limits and respective prejudice to parties (which in the case of the appellant included being subject to criminal proceedings) interests of justice served by granting permission to appeal out of time

[2014] UKFTT 52 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521700

Secret Hotels2 Ltd (Formerly Med Hotels Ltd) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 15 Mar 2010

FTTTx Value Added Tax – Whether supplies of hotel and other holiday accommodation made by Appellant as agent for accommodation suppliers or as principal.
Value Added Tax – If Appellant is principal whether supplies made by it to travel agents wholesale supplies on business to business basis

[2010] UKFTT 120 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
At FTTTxSecret Hotels2 Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 3-Dec-2012
The Revenue appealed from a finding at the UTTC that the taxpayer company had acted not as a principal but rather as an agent.
Held: Morgan J was wrong to criticise the FTT for looking at ‘the whole facts of the case’ as opposed to . .
At FTTTxRevenue 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, . .
At FTTTxSecrets Hotels2 Limited UTTC 29-Jul-2011
Value Added Tax – written agreements to provide hotel accommodation to holidaymakers – identity of supplier – was it hotel operator or company operating a bookings website – principles as to construction of written agreements – no difference because . .
At FTTTxRevenue 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, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.408975

Davis and Dann Ltd and Precis (1080) Ltd v HMRC: UTTC 6 Aug 2013

UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – denial of repayment of input tax due to MTIC fraud – ‘grey market’ transaction in razor blades – nature of and terms on which transactions entered into – other parties to the transactions unconnected with the fraud – whether FTT erred in concluding on the facts that the only reasonable explanation for the circumstances in which the taxpayers’ purchases took place was that they were connected with fraud – yes – whether taxpayers should have been aware of the connection with fraud earlier in the chain of transactions – no – appeal allowed

[2013] UKUT 374 (TCC), [2013] STI 2860, [2013] BVC 1707, [2014] STC 39
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromDavis and Dann Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 17-Jan-2012
FTTTx Value Added Tax – MTIC appeal involving purchases of razor blades by the Appellants in April and May 2006 – whether the Appellants should have known that their purchases were connected to the fraudulent . .

Cited by:
At UTTCDavis and Dann Ltd and Another v HM Revenue and Customs CA 15-Mar-2016
The Revenue appealed from rejection of its refusal to refund input tax in the basis that the company though itself innocent of VAT fraud should have understood that the transaction was part of a MTIC fraud. The court was now asked whether the Upper . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.521006

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

[2013] UKFTT 730 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.519632

Iveco Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Dec 2013

FTTTx VAT – preliminary issue – whether claim in respect of article 11C(1), Sixth Directive precluded by time limit in s 80(4) VATA or otherwise – assumed bonus payments made in period 1 January 1978 to 31 December 1989 giving rise to reductions in taxable amounts – VAT regulations 1995, reg 38 – jurisdiction of tribunal – s 83(1) VATA – whether claim otherwise barred under EU law by failure to make claim in reasonable time

[2013] UKFTT 763 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.519628

Katell Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Dec 2013

FTTTx VAT – preliminary issue – whether claim in respect of article 11C(1), Sixth Directive precluded by time limit in s 80(4) VATA or otherwise – assumed bonus payments made in period 1 January 1978 to 31 December 1989 giving rise to reductions in taxable amounts – VAT regulations 1995, reg 38 – jurisdiction of tribunal – s 83(1) VATA – whether claim otherwise barred under EU law by failure to make claim in reasonable time

[2013] UKFTT 751 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.519629

Toner and Another (T/A The Soft Drinks Co) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jul 2013

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – denial of right to deduct on grounds that the Appellant knew or should have known that the transaction was part of fraud by others – alleged MTIC – whether shown that the Appellant’s transactions connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT – yes – whether Appellant ‘knew or should have known’ of fraud – yes – valid refusal of right to deduct – appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 670 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.518588

Le Bistingo Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Oct 2013

FTTTx VAT – purported appeal against ‘decision’ of HMRC that appellant required to make online VAT returns – liability to file online arising automatically under secondary legislation without requirement for HMRC to reach a ‘decision’- whether the European Convention on Human Rights relevant – no – appeal struck out for lack of jurisdiction

[2013] UKFTT 524 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516904

GSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: Admn 22 Apr 2013

The claimant, a partnersip beween a commercial company and tow NHS hospital trusts sought an order suspending a decision that its services, the supply of pathology services to the trusts was exempt from VAT

Leggatt J
[2013] EWHC 1801 (Admin), [2013] STI 2566
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoGSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs (No 2) Admn 22-Apr-2013
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.515304

Rapid Sequence Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Aug 2013

FTTTx VAT – exemption for medical care – whether applies to services provided by company acting as a principal in providing medical doctors on a locum basis to hospitals – no – Article 132(1)(c) Principal VAT Directive – Schedule 9 Group 7 Item 5 Value Added Tax Act 1994 – appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 432 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.515225

Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings: ECJ 22 Dec 2010

ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Right to deduction – Purchase of vehicles and use for leasing transactions – Differences between the tax regimes of two Member States – Prohibition of abusive practices
‘taxable persons are generally free to choose the organisational structures and the form of transactions which they consider to be most appropriate for their economic activities and for the purposes of limiting their tax burdens’, albeit that this is subject to an exception for ‘abusive transactions’.

K. Lenaerts, P
[2010] EUECJ C-277/09, ECLI:EU:C:2010:810, [2011] STI 262, [2011] BVC 138, [2011] STC 345
Bailii
European
Citing:
OpinionCommissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings ECJ 30-Sep-2010
ECJ Opinion – Interpretation of Article 17(3)(a) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Transactions carried out with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage – Provision of vehicle leasing services in the United Kingdom . .
At VDT (2)RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Revenue and Customs VDT 3-May-2005
VDT Applications – opposed motion to sist part of the proceedings in the appeal pending an ECJ Decision: Application for an order for disclosure of documents – necessity of documents, relevance to issue . .
At VDT (1)RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Customs and Excise VDT 16-Nov-2004
VDT Application: Interlocutory Hearing – Jurisdiction – whether appeal raised in Edinburgh should be transmitted to London in respect that there was another connected appeal there – whether Appellants with . .
At Inner HouseRevenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh SCS 13-Jan-2006
SCS The taxpayer, a German subsidiary of a UK bank, carried on a banking and leasing business in Germany. It did not have a place of establishment in the UK. It was registered in the UK for VAT as a . .
At VDT (3)RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Revenue and Customs VDT 24-Jul-2007
VDT VAT – deduction of input tax – leasing of cars within UK by German subsidiary company – cars purchased within UK, remaining there and subject to VAT in UK – leasing deemed to be supply of services in Germany . .

Cited by:
CitedRevenue and Customs v Pendragon Plc and Others SC 10-Jun-2015
‘This appeal is about an elaborate scheme designed and marketed by KPMG relating to demonstrator cars used by retail distributors for test drives and other internal purposes. In the ordinary course, a car distributor will buy new cars for use as . .
CitedRevenue 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, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.513675

GSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs (No 2): Admn 22 Apr 2013

Leggatt J
[2013] EWHC 1823 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See AlsoGSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 22-Apr-2013
The claimant, a partnersip beween a commercial company and tow NHS hospital trusts sought an order suspending a decision that its services, the supply of pathology services to the trusts was exempt from VAT . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.511221

Revenue And Customs v Newey: ECJ 20 Jun 2013

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Sixth VAT Directive – Article 2(1) and Article 6(1) – Meaning of ‘supply of services’ – Supply of advertising and loan broking services – Exemptions – Economic and commercial reality of the transactions – Abusive practices – Transactions with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage
The Court emphasised: ‘that a supply of services is effected ‘for consideration’, within the meaning of article 2(1) of [the Sixth] directive, and hence is taxable, only if there is a legal relationship between the provider of the service and the recipient pursuant to which there is reciprocal performance, the remuneration received by the provider of the service constituting the value actually given in return for the service supplied to the recipient’. It explained that ‘the supply of services is therefore objective in nature and applies without regard to the purpose or results of the transactions concerned and without its being necessary for the tax authorities to carry out inquiries to determine the intention of the taxable person’. The court then observed that ‘consideration of economic and commercial realities is a fundamental criterion for the application of the common system of VAT’ and that ‘the contractual position normally reflects the economic and commercial reality of the transactions’. An exception to the normal rule that the contractual relationship is central was then identified by the court as being where ‘those contractual terms constitute a purely artificial arrangement which does not correspond with the economic and commercial reality of the transactions’
. . And: ‘As regards in particular the importance of contractual terms in categorising a transaction as a taxable transaction, it is necessary to bear in mind the case law of the court according to which consideration of economic and commercial realities is a fundamental criterion for the application of the common system of VAT
Given that the contractual position normally reflects the economic and commercial reality of the transactions and in order to satisfy the requirements of legal certainty, the relevant contractual terms constitute a factor to be taken into consideration when the supplier and the recipient in a ‘supply of services’ transaction within the meaning of articles 2(1) and 6(1) of the Sixth Directive have to be identified.
It may, however, become apparent that, sometimes, certain contractual terms do not wholly reflect the economic and commercial reality of the transactions.
That is the case in particular if it becomes apparent that those contractual terms constitute a purely artificial arrangement which does not correspond with the economic and commercial reality of the transactions.’

Ilesic, P
[2013] STI 2304, [2013] EUECJ C-653/11, [2013] BVC 259, [2013] STC 2432
Bailii
European
Cited by:
CitedAirtours 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 . .
CitedRevenue 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, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.511012

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 had to all the circumstances in which the transaction in question takes place. In cases where a scheme operates through a construct of contractual relationships, it is necessary to look at the matter as a whole in order to determine its economic reality.

Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Walker, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath
[2013] UKSC 42, UKSC 2009/0154
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCommissioners 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 . .
At VDTLoyalty 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 ChDRevenue 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 . .
See AlsoRevenue 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 . .
At ECJLoyalty 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 . .
ECJ Prel RulingLoyalty 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 . .
CitedLoyalty 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 . .

Cited by:
CitedWHA 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 . .
CitedLumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.510940

Oxfam v Revenue and Customs: ChD 27 Nov 2009

The charity appealed against refusal to allow it to reclaim input VAT. It also sought judicial review of the decision of the Tribunal not to allow it to raise an argument of legitimate expectation. The charity had various subsidiaries conducting commercial activities, which paid VAT in its supplies. The parties disputed how input taxes were attributed between the different activitie, particularly in the context of unrestricted fundraising expenditure.
Held: The Tribunal had had power to listen to the argument on legitimate expectation. In 2000, the revenue had written to the claimant setting out the agreed calculation methods, but the law had altered on the Church of England case. However ‘in a case such as this, involving an assurance given to only one person and where there is no irrationality on the part of the public authority in adopting a different approach, the absence of detrimental reliance on the part of the person to whom the assurance is given is fatal to the argument that to modify the assurance would involve an abuse of power on the part of the public authority which gave the assurance.’

Sales J
[2009] EWHC 3078 (Ch), Times 31-Dec-2009
Bailii
Value Added Tax Act 1994 24(5), Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC 17
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromOxfam v Revenue and Customs VDT 30-Jul-2008
VDT VAT – INPUT TAX – Charity applying method apportioning VAT to business purposes – Church of England Children’s Society decision permitted the Appellant to recover part of VAT incurred on unrestricted . .
CitedGus 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. . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v The Boots Company Plc ChD 16-Mar-2009
. .
CitedChurch of England Children’s Society v Revenue and Customs ChD 29-Jul-2005
The Society sent out free newsletters to its unpaid fund-raisers and supporters. They sought to deduct input tax charged to them from the supplies associated with the costs.
Held: The Society might be able to deduct such tax as residual input . .
CitedKretztechnik AG v Finanzamt Linz ECJ 26-May-2005
Europa Sixth VAT Directive – Supplies for consideration – Share issue – Admission of a company to a stock exchange – Deductibility of VAT).
Kretztechnik’s objects were the development and sale of . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte MFK Underwriting Agents Ltd CA 1990
Legitimate Expectation once created not withdrawn
The claimant said that a change of practice by the Revenue was contrary to a legitimate expectation.
Held: The Inland Revenue could not withdraw from a representation if it would cause: substantial unfairness to the applicant; if the . .
CitedRegina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
CitedBamber, Regina (on the Application Of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 21-Dec-2005
. .
CitedRegina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
CitedBritish Oxygen Co Ltd v Board of Trade HL 15-Jul-1970
Cylinders containing hydrogen gas were being put on a trailer pulled by a tractor for the purpose of delivery to the premises of the purchaser. One of the issues before the court was whether the function of the hydrogen trailers and the cylinders . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd HL 9-Apr-1981
Limitations on HMRC discretion on investigation
The Commissioners had been concerned at tax evasion of up to 1 million pounds a year by casual workers employed in Fleet Street. They agreed with the employers and unions to collect tax in the future, but that they would not pursue those who had . .
CitedMullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant had been imprisoned, but his conviction was later overturned. He had been a victim of a gross abuse of executive power. The British authorities had acted in breach of international law and had been guilty of ‘a blatant and extremely . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
Duty of Fairness to taxpayer – Written Assurance
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
CitedIn Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Charity, Administrative

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.381597

Axel Kittel v Belgian State; Belgian State v Recolta Recycling SPRL: ECJ 6 Jul 2006

ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Deduction of input tax – ‘Carousel’ fraud – Contract of sale incurably void under domestic law.
The right of a taxpayer to deduct Input Tax may be refused if: ‘it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that the taxable person knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT.’
Where it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that a recipient of a supply of goods is a taxable person who knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT, it is for the national court to refuse that taxable person entitlement to the right to deduct VAT he has paid: ‘an analysis of the terms ‘supply of goods effected by a taxable person acting as such’ and ‘economic activities’ shows that those terms, which define taxable transactions for the purposes of the Sixth Directive, are objective in nature and apply without regard to the purpose or results of the transactions concerned (see, to that effect, Joined Cases C-354/03, C-355/03 and C-484/03 Optigen [2006] Ch 218, paras. 43 and 44).
traders who take every precaution which could reasonably be required of them to ensure that their transactions are not connected with fraud . . must be able to rely on the legality of those transactions without the risk of losing their right to deduct the input VAT (see, to that effect, Case C-384/04 Federation of Technological Industries [2006] STC 1483, para. 33).
By contrast, the objective criteria which form the basis of the concepts of ‘supply of goods effected by a taxable person acting as such’ and ‘economic activity’ are not met where tax is evaded by the taxable person himself (see Case C-255/02 Halifax and Others [2006] Ch 387, paras. 59).
Where the tax authorities find that the right to deduct has been exercised fraudulently, they are permitted to claim repayment of the deducted sums retroactively (see, inter alia, Case 268/83 Rompelman [1985] 2 CMLR 202, para. 24; Case C-110/94 INZO [1996] STC 569, para. 24; and Joined Cases C-110/98 to C-147/98 Gabalfrisa [2002] STC 535, para. 46) . .
a taxable person who knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was taking part in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT must, for the purposes of the Sixth Directive, be regarded as a participant in that fraud, irrespective of whether or not he profited by the resale of the goods.
That is because in such a situation the taxable person aids the perpetrators of the fraud and becomes their accomplice.
In addition, such an interpretation, by making it more difficult to carry out fraudulent transactions, is apt to prevent them.
Therefore, it is for the referring court to refuse entitlement to the right to deduct where it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that the taxable person knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT, and to do so even where the transaction in question meets the objective criteria which form the basis of the concepts of ‘supply of goods effected by a taxable person acting as such’ and ‘economic activity”

C-439/04, [2006] EUECJ C-439/04
Bailii
European
Citing:
See AlsoAxel Kittel v Belgian State; Belgian State v Recolta Recycling SPRL C-440/04 ECJ 6-Jul-2006
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Deduction of input tax – ‘Carousel’ fraud – Contract of sale incurably void under domestic law. . .

Cited by:
CitedMobilx Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs; Blue Sphere Global Ltd v Same and similar CA 12-May-2010
Each company sought repayment of input VAT. HMRC refused, saying that the transactions were the end-product of a fraud on it, and that even if the taxpayer did not know that a fraud was involved, it should have been aware that one was and acted . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v SED Essex Ltd ChD 14-Jun-2013
Liquidator confirmed despite VAT challege
The Revenue sought the winding up of the company for non-payment of substantial arrears of VAT. The revenue had declined to allow VAT input claims. The company said that the petition was wrong since the debt was genuinely disputed.
Held: The . .
CitedElse Refining and Recycling Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 23-Jul-2012
VALUE ADDED TAX – MTIC – HMRC’s refusal to repay VAT on supplies connected with fraudulent VAT evasion – connection conceded by the appellant – only issues were whether the appellant knew or should have known of the connection – Axel Kittel v . .
CitedMicroring Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Value Added Tax – Kittel Denial of Input Tax) FTTTx 12-Jul-2019
VALUE ADDED TAX — Kittel denial of input tax – strike out applications – whether issue estoppel applies – no – whether HMRC should be barred from part of the proceedings – no – – whether Appellant’s appeal should be struck out in part – no – . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.243021

British Eventing Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Aug 2010

FTTTx VAT – Appellant paying reverse premium on assignment of lease – whether locus standi to challenge taxable status of reverse premium and/or recover VAT paid on it; whether reverse premium attributable to assignment of lease and, if not, to what; whether HMRC’s decision to refuse permission to opt leased property wrong in law.

[2010] UKFTT 382 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.422348

Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008

The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations contained the entire regime.
Held: Criminal conduct at common law or by statute can constitute unlawful means in an unlawful means conspiracy. The protection of the Bill of Rights is available to everyone. Fraudsters and cheats are as much entitled to be protected against the levying of taxes without the authority of Parliament as anyone else. The function of an action of damages is to provide a remedy for interests that are recognised by the law as entitled to protection
‘The statute makes no provision for the recovery of VAT from someone who is not a taxable person within the meaning of section 3. There is, it may be said, a gap in the statute. But this does not mean that the Commissioners have suffered a loss for which they can sue in damages. All that can be said is that payment was made to Alldech which ought not to have been made. It is an amount that can be recovered as a debt due to the Crown from Alldech. It does not change its character as a debt due to the Crown because, when it is sought to be recovered from someone else, it is described as damages. ‘
Lord Scott said: ‘there is, in my opinion, nothing whatever in the Bill of Rights point. It is true that Total are not taxable under the statutory VAT scheme in respect of any of the pleaded transactions, but the claim against Total is not a claim for tax. It is a claim for damages, for loss, caused by the fraudulent conspiracy.’

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
[2008] UKHL 19, [2008] BPIR 699, [2008] 2 WLR 711, [2008] STI 938, [2008] 1 AC 1174, [2008] STC 644, [2008] BVC 340, [2008] BTC 5216
Bailii, HL
Value Added Tax Act 1994 1(1) 7, Bill of Rights 1688 4
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedTotal Network Sl v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 31-Jan-2007
The defendants suspected a carousel VAT fraud. The defendants appealed a finding that there was a viable cause of action alleging a ‘conspiracy where the unlawful means alleged is a common law offence of cheating the public revenue’. The defendants . .
CitedGosling v Veley 1850
Wilde CJ said: ‘The rule of law that no pecuniary burden can be imposed upon the subjects of this country, by whatever name it may be called, whether tax, due, rate, or toll, except under clear and distinct legal authority, established by those who . .
CitedAttorney-General v Wilts United Dairies Ltd CA 1921
The Food Controller had been given power under the Defence of the Realm Acts to regulate milk sales. In granting the dairy a licence to buy milk in Cornwall, Devon, Dorset and Somerset, the Food Controller required the Dairy to pay 2d. per imperial . .
CitedAttorney-General v Wilts United Dairies Ltd HL 1922
The House heard an appeal by the Attorney-General against a finding that an imposition of duty on milk sales was unlawful.
Held: The appeal failed. The levy was unlawful. Lord Buckmaster said: ‘Neither of those two enactments enabled the Food . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Hambrook 1956
The Revenue claimed for loss resulting from its being deprived of the services of a taxing officer due to a vehicle accident.
Held: The action was dismissed. An action for that kind of loss did not lie where its relationship was with an . .
CitedAutologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .
CitedLonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) HL 1-Apr-1981
No General Liability in Tort for Wrongful Acts
The plaintiff had previously constructed an oil supply pipeline from Beira to Mozambique. After Rhodesia declared unilateral independence, it became a criminal offence to supply to Rhodesia without a licence. The plaintiff ceased supply as required, . .
CitedLonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) CA 6-Mar-1981
Lonrho had supplied oil to Southern Rhodesia. It gave up this profitable business when the UK imposed sanctions on that country. It claimed that Shell had conspired unlawfully to break the sanctions, thereby prolonging the illegal regime in Southern . .
CitedMarrinan v Vibart CA 1962
The court considered an action in the form an attempt to circumvent the immunity of a witness at civil law by alleging a conspiracy.
Held: The claim was rejected. The court considered the basis of the immunity from action given to witnesses. . .
CitedCrofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Company Limited v Veitch HL 15-Dec-1941
The plaintiffs sought an interdict against the respondents, a dockers’ union, who sought to impose an embargo on their tweeds as they passed through the port of Stornoway.
Held: A trade embargo was not tortious because the predominant purpose . .
CitedCrofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co Ltd v Veitch SCS 1940
Lord Justice Clerk Aitchison said: ‘When the end of a combination is not a crime or a tort in the accepted sense, and the means are not in the accepted sense criminal or tortious – cases which give rise to no difficulty – the question always is – . .
CitedAllen v Flood HL 14-Dec-1898
Tort of Malicicious Inducement not Committed
Mr Flood had in the course of his duties as a trade union official told the employers of some ironworkers that the ironworkers would go on strike, unless the employers ceased employing some woodworkers, who the ironworkers believed had worked on . .
CitedSorrell v Smith HL 1925
Torts of Conspiracy by Unlawful Means
The plaintiff had struck the first blow in a commercial battle between the parties, and the defendant then defended himself, whereupon the plaintiff sued him.
Lord Cave quoted the French saying: ‘cet animal est tres mechant; quand on . .
CitedHargreaves v Bretherton 1959
The Plaintiff pleaded that the First Defendant police officer had falsely and maliciously and without justification or excuse committed perjury at the Plaintiff’s trial on charges of criminal offences and that as a result the Plaintiff had been . .
CitedQuinn v Leathem HL 5-Aug-1901
Unlawful Means Conspiracy has two forms
Quinn was treasurer of a Belfast butchers’ association. Leathem, who traded as a butcher, employed some non-union men, although when the union made difficulties he asked for them to be admitted to the union, and offered to pay their dues. The union . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar HL 2-May-2007
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. . .
CitedSnook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd CA 1967
Sham requires common intent to create other result
The court considered a claim by a hire-purchase company for the return of a vehicle. The bailee said the agreement was a sham.
Held: The word ‘sham’ should only be used to describe an act or document where the parties have a common intention . .
CitedOptigen Ltd, Fulcrum Electronics Ltd, Bond House Systems Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 12-Jan-2006
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 2(1), Article 4(1) and (2) and Article 5(1) – Deduction of input tax – Economic activity – Taxable person acting as such – Supply of goods – Transaction forming part of a chain . .
CitedMogul Steamship Company Limited v McGregor Gow and Co QBD 10-Aug-1885
Ship owners formed themselves into an association to protect their trading interests which then caused damage to rival ship owners. The plaintiffs complained about being kept out of the conference of shipowners trading between China and London.
CitedYukong Lines Ltd v Rendsburg Investments Corporation and Others (No 2) QBD 23-Sep-1997
Repudiation by charterer: Funds were transferred by a charterer’s ‘alter ego’ to another company controlled by him with intent to defeat owner’s claim – whether ‘alter ego’ acting as undisclosed principal of charterer – whether permissible to pierce . .
CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
CitedRegina v Clarence CCCR 20-Nov-1888
The defendant knew that he had gonorrhea. He had intercourse with his wife, and infected her. She would not have consented had she known. He appealed his convictions for assault and causing grievous bodily harm.
Held: ‘The question in this . .
CitedCutler v Wandsworth Stadium Ltd HL 1949
The Act required the occupier of a licensed racetrack to take all steps necessary to secure that, so long as a totalisator was being lawfully operated on the track, there was available for bookmakers space on the track where they could conveniently . .
CitedRookes v Barnard (No 1) HL 21-Jan-1964
The court set down the conditions for the award of exemplary damages. There are two categories. The first is where there has been oppressive or arbitrary conduct by a defendant. Cases in the second category are those in which the defendant’s conduct . .
CitedDaily Mirror Newspapers Ltd v Gardner CA 1968
The Federation of Retail Newsagents decided to boycott the Daily Mirror for a week to persuade its publishers to pay higher margins, and advised them accordingly. The publishers sought an injunction saying the Federation was procuring a breach of . .
DoubtedMichaels and Michaels v Taylor Woodrow Developments Ltd, etc ChD 19-Apr-2000
The respondents sought to strike out the claim for conspiracy and failure to comply with the Act. The respondent was landlord of premises occupied by the claimants. They had served a notice under the Act of their intention to sell.
Held: The . .
CitedSurzur Overseas Ltd v Koros and others CA 25-Feb-1999
A defendant to a worldwide Mareva injunction had failed to give full disclosure of all his assets in an affidavit filed with the court. False evidence as to sale of the assets in question was later manufactured and placed before the court. The . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Goldblatt 1972
In a winding up case, the Commissioners can if necessary proceed against a receiver for misfeasance. . .
CitedEx parte Island Records CA 1978
An injunction is available to any person who can show that a private right or interest has been interfered with by a criminal act. . .
CitedRCA Corporation v Pollard CA 1982
The illegal activities of bootleggers who had made unauthorised recordings of concerts, diminished the profitability of contracts granting to the plaintiffs the exclusive right to exploit recordings by Elvis Presley.
Held: The defendant’s . .
CitedW T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
CitedOren, Tiny Love Limited v Red Box Toy Factory Limited, Red Box Toy (UK) Limited, Index Limited, Martin Yaffe International Limited, Argos Distributors Limited PatC 1-Feb-1999
One plaintiff was the exclusive licensee of a registered design. The defendant sold articles alleged to infringe the design right. The registered owner had a statutory right to sue for infringement. But the question was whether the licensee could . .
CitedRegina v Mavji CACD 1987
The court considered the offence of cheating the public revenue.
Held: Cheating might include any form of fraudulent conduct which resulted in diverting money from the revenue and depriving the revenue of money to which it was entitled. . .
CitedMetall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 1990
There was a complicated commercial dispute involving allegations of conspiracy. A claim by the plaintiffs for inducing or procuring a breach of contract would have been statute-barred in New York.
Held: Slade LJ said: ‘The judge’s approach to . .
CitedRex v Bainbridge 1782
. .
CitedRegina v Hudson 1956
To avoid the payment of tax by positive false representations constitutes a fraud on the Crown and a fraud on the public. It is a common law offence and is indictable as such. . .
CitedWoolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2) HL 20-Jul-1992
The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. It paid money on account of the tax demanded. It won and recovered the sums paid, but the revenue refused to pay any interest accrued on the sums paid. . .
CitedDeutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another HL 25-Oct-2006
The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred.
Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when . .
CitedCommissioners of Customs and Excise, Attorney General v Federation of Technological Industries and Others ECJ 11-May-2006
ECJ (Taxation) C-197/03 Sixth VAT Directive – Articles 21(3) and 22(8) – National measures to combat fraud – Joint and several liability for the payment of VAT – Provision of security for VAT payable by another . .
CitedHenderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd HL 25-Jul-1994
Lloyds Agents Owe Care Duty to Member; no Contract
Managing agents conducted the financial affairs of the Lloyds Names belonging to the syndicates under their charge. It was alleged that they managed these affairs with a lack of due careleading to enormous losses.
Held: The assumption of . .
CitedMarcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited HL 4-Dec-2003
The claimant’s house was regularly flooded by waters including also foul sewage from the respondent’s neighbouring premises. He sought damages and an injunction. The defendants sought to restrict the claimant to his statutory rights.
Held: The . .
CitedJohnson v Unisys Ltd HL 23-Mar-2001
The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to him under the Employment Rights Act 1996 through the Employment Tribunal system.
Held: The statutory system for compensation for unfair . .
CitedShiloh Spinners Ltd v Harding HL 13-Dec-1972
A right of re-entry had been reserved in the lease on the assignment (and not on the initial grant) of a term of years in order to reinforce covenants (to support, fence and repair) which were taken for the benefit of other retained land of the . .
CitedMacNiven (Inspector of Taxes) v Westmoreland Investments Ltd HL 15-Feb-2001
The fact that a payment of interest was made only to create a tax advantage did not prevent its being properly claimed. Interest was paid for the purposes of setting it against tax, when the debt was discharged. A company with substantial losses had . .

Cited by:
CitedChild Poverty Action Group, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Work and Pensions CA 14-Oct-2009
CPAG appealed against a refusal of a declaration that the respondent could use only the 1992 Act to recover overpayment of benefits where there had been neither misrepresentation nor non-disclosure.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and the court . .
CitedDigicel (St Lucia) Ltd and Others v Cable and Wireless Plc and Others ChD 15-Apr-2010
The claimants alleged breaches of legislation by members of the group of companies named as defendants giving rise to claims in conspiracy to injure by unlawful means. In effect they had been denied the opportunity to make interconnections with . .
CitedMobilx Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs; Blue Sphere Global Ltd v Same and similar CA 12-May-2010
Each company sought repayment of input VAT. HMRC refused, saying that the transactions were the end-product of a fraud on it, and that even if the taxpayer did not know that a fraud was involved, it should have been aware that one was and acted . .
CitedThe Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 8-Dec-2010
The Action Group had obtained a declaration that, where an overpayment of benefits had arisen due to a miscalculation by the officers of the Department, any process of recovering the overpayment must be by the Act, and that the Department could not . .
AppliedThe Racing Partnership Ltd and Others v Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Ltd and Others ChD 8-May-2019
Actions concerning the alleged infringement of the claimants’ rights in respect of data relating to horseracing. The claimant had provided horse race betting odds (Betting shows) to race course owners. A rival company had provided similar data to . .
CitedThe Racing Partnership Ltd and Others v Sports Information Services Ltd CA 9-Oct-2020
The court looked at the limitations: (1) the legal protection of sports data and other information which is not subject to traditional intellectual property rights; (2) the scope of an action under the equitable doctrine of breach of confidence or . .
CitedJSC BTA Bank v Khrapunov SC 21-Mar-2018
A had been chairman of the claimant bank. After removal, A fled to the UK, obtaining asylum. The bank then claimed embezzlement, and was sentenced for contempt after failing to disclose assets when ordered, but fled the UK. The Appellant, K, was A’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Torts – Other, Customs and Excise, Constitutional

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.266167

Direktor Na Direktsia v Orfey Balgaria Eood: ECJ 19 Dec 2012

dndirektsia_obeECJ2012

ECJ VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 63, 65, 73 and 80 – Establishment by natural persons of a building right in favour of a company in exchange for construction services by that company for those persons – Barter contract – VAT on construction services – Chargeable event – When chargeable – Payment on account of the entire consideration – Payment on account – Basis of assessment for a transaction in the event of consideration in the form of goods or services – Direct effect

C Toader, acting P
C-549/11, [2012] EUECJ C-549/11
Bailii
Directive 2006/112/EC

European, VAT, Construction

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.468764

Argos Distributors v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: ECJ 24 Oct 1996

VAT was payable on the value of a discount voucher only, and not on the full price of the goods. ‘According to the court’s settled case law, the taxable amount for the supply of goods or services is represented by the consideration actually received for them.’ VAT had been charged on vouchers on a basis inconsistent with Community law. The reference raised no question about whether the same could be said about teacakes: ‘There is only one difference between the early vouchers claim and the [late vouchers and teacakes] claims; as regards the early vouchers claim, the national legislation itself contravened the Directive, whereas with respect to the other two claims that legislation was unimpeachable in itself but was misapplied. Yet the end result in the two instances was precisely the same: the Directive was breached . . ‘ and ‘It is manifestly clear from the documents before the court that, in regard to both teacakes and gift vouchers after August 1992, the commissioners applied national tax legislation in a manner inconsistent with the directive.’

Advocate General Geelhoed
Times 18-Nov-1996, C-288/94, [1996] STC 1359, [1996] ECR I-5311, [1996] EUECJ C-288/94, [1997] QB 499
Bailii
Cited by:
CitedNell Gwynn House Maintenance Fund v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 15-Dec-1998
Trustees who managed a group of apartments argued that they did not themselves provide staff services to the tenants, but rather arranged for the staff to provide services to them.
Held: The contract providing cleaning and other services, by a . .
CitedLex 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, . .
CitedMarks 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 . .
CitedMarks 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.161452

Wolfgang und Dr. Wilfried Rey Grundstucksgemeinschaft Gbr v Finanzamt Krefeld: ECJ 9 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax – Directive 77/388/EEC – Third subparagraph of Article 17(5) – Field of application – Deduction of input tax – Goods and services used for both taxable and exempt transactions (mixed-use goods and services) – Determination of the assignation of goods and services purchased for the construction, use, conservation and maintenance of a building that serves to carry out, in part, transactions in respect of which VAT is deductible and, in part, transactions in respect of which VAT is not deductible – Amendment of the national legislation laying down the method of calculating the deductible proportion – Article 20 – Adjustment of deductions – Legal certainty – Legitimate expectations

C-332/14, [2016] EUECJ C-332/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:417
Bailii
Directive 77/388/EEC 17(5)

European, VAT

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.565637

X v Skatteverket: ECJ 6 May 2010

ECJ Value-added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Intra-Community acquisition of a new sailing boat – Use of goods in the State of origin or another Member State before being transported to the Member State of destination – Period of time for commencement of transport to the State of destination – Material time for determination as a new means of transport.

C-84/09, [2010] EUECJ C-84/09 – O
Bailii
European
Cited by:
OpinionX v Skatteverket 18-Nov-2010
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.410791

Martland v The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs (Tax): UTTC 1 Jun 2018

Exercise of Discretion to hear Late Appeals

Excise Duty – assessment to duty and wrongdoing penalty – application for permission to make late appeal – test to be applied – appeal dismissed
The tribunal discussed the jurisdiction of the First Tier Tribunal to allow an appeal to be made after the statutory time limit: ‘In deciding whether or not to permit a late appeal, the FTT is exercising a discretion specifically and directly conferred on it by statute to permit an appeal to come into existence at all. It is not exercising some case management discretion in the conduct of an extant appeal. . . it is not appropriate to regard the exercise of the discretion as involving a direct application of Rule 2 of the FTT Rules (Rule 2 being concerned with ‘dealing with a case fairly and justly’ in relation to the various procedural matters identified in it – i.e. once proceedings have been properly commenced before the FTT). Nor, it will be noted, does Rule 20 apply to such matters (merely requiring that a late notice of appeal must contain a request for permission pursuant to the relevant enactment, and stating that the appeal must not be admitted unless permission is granted). That said, as will become apparent below, the principle embodied in the overriding objective is a broad one, and one which applies just as much to the exercise of a judicial discretion of the type involved in this appeal as it does to the exercise of such a discretion in relation to more routine procedural matters.’

[2018] UKUT 178 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRomasave (Property Services) Ltd v Revenue and Customs UTTC 27-May-2015
Existence of Discretion to hear late Appeal
VAT – whether assessments were duly notified to the taxpayer – VATA 1994, s 73(2), s 83G and s 98 – Interpretation Act, s 7 – Companies Act 2006, s 1139(1) – whether notification of assessment invalidated by error on the face of the notice of . .

Cited by:
CitedMoss, Executor of David Owen (Deceased) v Revenue and Customs (Whether To Give Permission for Late Appeal To Be Made To HMRC – Martland – Inheritance Tax) FTTTx 11-Nov-2019
PROCEDURE – whether to give permission for late appeal to be made to HMRC – Martland – Inheritance Tax . .
CitedSwallow v Revenue and Customs (Late Appeal – Martland Considered) FTTTx 23-Jan-2020
LATE APPEAL – Martland considered – length of delay is serious and significant – no good reason for delay – in all the circumstances fairness and justice do not support an extension of time — application refused . .
CitedMurgasanu v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 10-Oct-2020
INCOME TAX – permission to make late appeal – finding of fact that appellant had not filed the return on paper within the time limit – relevant case law on late appeals considered and applied – permission refused . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.617298

Finanzamt Gummersbach v Bockemuhl: ECJ 1 Apr 2004

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Interpretation of Article 18(1) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Conditions for exercise of the right to deduct input VAT – Recipient of a service referred to in Article 9(2)(e) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Supply of staff by a taxable person established abroad – Recipient liable for VAT as the person to whom the supply was made – Requirement to hold an invoice – Content of the invoice

C-90/02, [2004] EUECJ C-90/02, [2006] BVC 95, [2004] CEC 303, [2004] 3 CMLR 5, [2004] ECR I-3303, [2006] BTC 5026, [2005] STC 934, [2004] STI 988
Bailii
European

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.195726

HMRC v London Clubs Management Limited: UTTC 5 Oct 2010

UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – residual input tax – partial exemption – whether floor area based new special method advanced by the casino taxpayer should be rejected in favour of old turnover based special – no – appeal dismissed

Proudman J
[2010] UKUT 365 (TCC), [2010] STI 2921, [2010] BVC 1563, [2010] STC 2789
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.428172

HM Revenue and Customs v BAA Ltd: UTTC 22 Jun 2011

UTTC Whether VAT recoverable as input tax on professional fees incurred by a bidding company in the course of a takeover of a target company which was a member of a VAT group; whether such services were attributable to the economic activities of the acquiring company combined with the taxable supplies of the VAT group; whether there was a direct and immediate link between the supplies constituted by the services and taxable supplies made by the VAT group; appeal by HMRC against decision of First-tier Tribunal successful; claim for input tax denied.

[2011] UKUT 258 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.441765

Swain v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 May 2013

FTTTx VAT – DIY residential conversion – conversion of barn to house – planning permission limiting occupation of property to manager or proprietor of holiday accommodation business to be operated from adjacent barns (for which planning permission also obtained) – whether conversion work was carried out in course or furtherance of a business – no – whether the separate use, or disposal of the property was prohibited by the planning permission for the purposes of Note (2)(c) to Group 5, Schedule 8 VAT Act 1994 – yes – appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 316 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Construction

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.513464

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 making, in the same transaction, both a supply of services to one person and a supply of different services to another person; and in addressing a claim for input tax by one of those persons, the relevant questions were (1) whether that person had made a payment to the supplier, (2) whether the payment was consideration for the services supplied to him, and (3) whether the services were used or to be used in the course of a business carried on by that person.
Lord Millett said: ‘In the present case the taxpayer did not merely derive a benefit from the services which the agents supplied to the householders and for which it paid. It chose the agents and instructed them. In return for the payment of their fees it obtained a contractual right to have the householders’ homes valued and marketed, to monitor the agents’ performance and maintain pressure for a quick sale, and to override any alteration in the agents’ instructions which the householders might be minded to give. Everything which the agents did was done at the taxpayer’s request and in accordance with its instructions and, in the events which happened, at its expense. The doing of those acts constituted a supply of services to Redrow.
The value added tax tribunal had the second of the two factors to which I have referred in mind when it said that it was necessary to await events and see to whom the agent makes the supply; it is only if the taxpayer becomes liable to pay the agent’s fees that his services are supplied to it. The commissioners criticised this reasoning, submitting that the destination of a supply must be ascertainable when it is made; it cannot be held in suspense to await subsequent events. But this assumes that the services rendered to the householder and those rendered to the taxpayer are the same. They are not. The services rendered to the householder are the ordinary services of an estate agent in the valuation and marketing of his house. If the householder sells his home but fails to complete the purchase of a Redrow home, he may become liable for the agent’s fees. He is not, however, entitled to deduct input tax in respect of the fees because, although the services in question were supplied to him, they were not used or to be used for the purpose of any business carried on or to be carried on by him.
The services obtained by the taxpayer are different. They consist of the right to have the householder’s home valued and marketed in accordance with the taxpayer’s instructions’.
‘ The word ‘services’ is given such a wide meaning for the purposes of value added tax that it is capable of embracing everything which a taxable person does in the course or furtherance of a business carried on by him which is done for a consideration. The name or description which one might apply to the service is immaterial, because the concept does not call for that kind of analysis. The service is that which is done in return for the consideration. As one moves down the chain of supply, each taxable person receives a service when another taxable person does something for him in the course or furtherance of a business carried on by that other person for which he takes a consideration in return. Questions such as who benefits from the service or who is the consumer of it are not helpful. The answers are likely to differ according to the interest which various people may have in the transaction. The matter has to be looked at from the standpoint of the person who is claiming the deduction by way of input tax. Was something being done for him for which, in the course or furtherance of a business carried on by him, he has had to pay a consideration which has attracted Value Added Tax? The fact that someone else–in this case, the prospective purchaser–also received a service as part of the same transaction does not deprive the person who instructed the service and who has had to pay for it of the benefit of the deduction.’

Lord Steyn, Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett
Times 18-Feb-1999, Gazette 03-Mar-1999, [1999] UKHL 4, [1999] STC 161, [1999] 2 All ER 13, [1999] 1 WLR 408, [1999] 2 Cr App R (S) 176, [1999] Crim LR 240, [1999] 2 Cr App R 36, [1999] 2 WLR 1100, [2000] QB 198
House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii
Value Added Tax Act 1983 3(2)(b)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Redrow Group Plc CA 3-Jul-1997
Where a house builder pays the estate agent’s bills on the sale of the buyer’s own house, the VAT paid on the estate agents’ invoices was not recoverable. . .
CitedBLP Group v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 6-Apr-1995
The use of taxable goods for an exempt transaction disallowed a claim against VAT input tax. The use in that provision of the words ‘for transactions’ shows that to give the right to deduct under paragraph 2, the goods or services in question must . .

Cited by:
CitedAshfield District Council v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 30-Nov-2001
The council were liable to pay grants for building works. They wished to set the VAT element as an input tax. The Commissioners refused. Did the builders supply their services to the house owners, or to the council who paid the bill. The Act allowed . .
CitedCommissioners 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 . .
CitedRevenue 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 . .
CitedLoyalty 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 . .
CitedRevenue 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 . .
CitedWHA 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 . .
CitedAirtours 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.158987

Revenue and Customs v SED Essex Ltd: ChD 14 Jun 2013

Liquidator confirmed despite VAT challege

The Revenue sought the winding up of the company for non-payment of substantial arrears of VAT. The revenue had declined to allow VAT input claims. The company said that the petition was wrong since the debt was genuinely disputed.
Held: The decision to appoint the provisional liquidator was maintained.
The court in the Rochdale Drinks case had now modified the test for the appointment of a provisional liquidator so that: ‘ the law now is that a judge dealing with such an application should consider it in 2 stages. The first and threshold stage is to consider whether the petitioner and applicant has demonstrated that it is likely to obtain a winding-up order on the hearing of the petition. Any views the judge may express about that will of course be provisional, because the petition itself is not being tried at the time of the application. If such likelihood is not demonstrated, it would not, at least ordinarily, be right to appoint a provisional liquidator. If on the other hand it is demonstrated, and the threshold thus crossed, then the second stage is to consider whether in the circumstances of the particular case, it is – as a matter of judicial discretion – right that a provisional liquidator should be appointed (or, where as here one has already been appointed, should be maintained in office) pending the hearing of the petition.’
The Revenue had satisfied the court that ‘both:
(a) there was fraudulent evasion of VAT connected (at whatever stage) to the Company’s purchases during the relevant 12 months, and
(b) the Company, in the person of Holly Sawyer, either knew that its purchases during that period were connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT, or should have known that the only reasonable explanation for the circumstances in which they took place was that they were so connected or ignored obvious inferences to that effect from the facts and circumstances in which the Company had been trading’ and ‘the evidence in this case does raise real questions as to the integrity of the Company’s management, and the quality of the Company’s business documentation, and accounting and record keeping functions.’ Both stages of the test were satisfied.

John Randall QC
[2013] EWHC 1583 (Ch)
Bailii
Insolvency Act 1986 122(1)(e) 123
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRevenue and Customs v Rochdale Drinks Distributors Ltd CA 13-Oct-2011
The revenue appealed against refusal of its petition for the winding up of the company for non-payment of a VAT assessment. The company said that the assessment was disputed. The revenue said that the company had been run for the purpose of . .
CitedRe Union Accident Insurance Co Ltd ChD 1972
A provisional liquidator cannot be appointed on a baseless petition. There are two conditions to be met. The first was that the petition must disclose a prima facie case, the second was that there were circumstances that require that a provisional . .
CitedThe Niedersachsen ChD 1983
In order to obtain, or to enlarge a freezing order, the applicant must show that in considering the evidence as a whole he has, at a minimum, a ‘good arguable case’, and also the existence of a real risk of dissipation or secretion of assets. . .
CitedMobilx Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs; Blue Sphere Global Ltd v Same and similar CA 12-May-2010
Each company sought repayment of input VAT. HMRC refused, saying that the transactions were the end-product of a fraud on it, and that even if the taxpayer did not know that a fraud was involved, it should have been aware that one was and acted . .
CitedAxel Kittel v Belgian State; Belgian State v Recolta Recycling SPRL ECJ 6-Jul-2006
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Deduction of input tax – ‘Carousel’ fraud – Contract of sale incurably void under domestic law.
The right of a taxpayer to deduct Input Tax may be refused if: ‘it is ascertained, . .
CitedCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Anglo German Breweries Limited ChD 29-Nov-2002
The respondents appealed against imposition of assessments for the diversion of alcohol products from bonded warehouses without payment of duties. Pretence had been made of deliveries abroad, but the goods were later diverted. The company was . .
CitedThe Commissioners for Customs and Excise, The Arena Corporation Limited v The Arena Corporation Limited / Schroeder ChD 12-Dec-2003
. .
CitedCustoms and Excise v Anglo Overseas Ltd ChD 5-Oct-2004
. .
CitedIn re The Arena Corporation Limited; Commissioners for Customs and Excise v The Arena Corporation Limited; the Arena Corporation Limited v Schroeder CA 25-Mar-2004
Sir Andrew Morritt V-C said that in the context of winding up proceedings the test for whether there is a genuine triable issue in a disputed claim, is whether the debt is bona fide disputed on substantial grounds, which, for practical purposes, is . .
CitedHM Customs and Excise v Jack Baars Wholesale, Baars, and Baars CmpC 16-Jan-2004
. .
CitedRe Autotech Design Ltd, HMRC v Autotech Design Ltd ChD 2006
Michael Briggs QC summarised the approach to be adopted by the court at the hearing of for the appointment of an interim liquidator pending the hearing of an insolvency petition brought by the Revenue: ‘Although the formulations of the approach to . .
CitedRed 12 Trading Ltd v Revenue and Customs ChD 20-Oct-2009
Appeal against refusal to allow reclaim of input tax in case of alleged ‘Missing Trader Intracommunity Fraud’.
Held: Christopher Clarke J said: ‘Examining individual transactions on their merits does not, however, require them to be regarded . .
CitedPayless Cash and Carry Ltd v Patel and Others ChD 29-Jul-2011
The claimant company, in liquidation, claimed large sums from the first defendant as a director who wrongfully and fraudulently caused it to incur a liability to HMRC for wrongfully claimed input tax on various liquor purchases.
Held: Mann J . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, VAT, Company

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510872

TNT Express Worldwide (Poland) Sp ZOO v Minister Finansow: ECJ 16 May 2013

ECJ Value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 66(a) to (c) – Transport and shipping services – Chargeability – Date on which payment is received and no later than 30 days from the date on which the services are supplied – Invoice issued earlier
M. Berger, P
C-169/12, [2013] EUECJ C-169/12
Bailii

Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.509302

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 claire, and a reference was made.
Nichoolls of Birkenhead, Steyn, Hoffmann, Walker of Guestingthorpe LL
[2005] UKHL 53, [2005] STC 1254
Bailii, House of Lords
Value Added Tax Act 1994 80
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBP Supergas Anonimos Etairia Geniki Emporiki-Viomichaniki kai Antiprossopeion v Greece ECJ 6-Jul-1995
Europa Under the procedure for a preliminary ruling provided for in Article 177 of the Treaty it is for the national courts alone, before which the proceedings are pending and which must assume responsibility for . .
CitedIdeal tourisme SA v Belgian State ECJ 13-Jul-2000
Europa In the present state of harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the common system of value added tax, the Community principle of equal treatment does not preclude legislation of a Member . .
CitedArgos Distributors v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 24-Oct-1996
VAT was payable on the value of a discount voucher only, and not on the full price of the goods. ‘According to the court’s settled case law, the taxable amount for the supply of goods or services is represented by the consideration actually received . .
CitedJust I/S v Danish Ministry For Fiscal Affairs ECJ 27-Feb-1980
ECJ Whilst the treaty does not exclude, in principle, a difference in the taxation of various alcoholic products, such a distinction may not be used for the purposes of tax discrimination or in such a manner as . .
Appeal fromMarks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise (No 5); Commissioners of Customs and Excise v University of Sussex CA 21-Oct-2003
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 . .
CitedWeber’s Wine World Handels-GmbH and Others v Abgabenberufungskommission Wien ECJ 2-Oct-2003
Europa Indirect taxation – Duty on sales of alcoholic beverages – Incompatibility with Community law – Recovery of duty. . .
CitedBecker v Finanzamt Muenster-Innenstadt ECJ 19-Jan-1982
ECJ It would be incompatible with the binding effect which article 189 of the EEC treaty ascribes to directives to exclude in principle the possibility of the obligation imposed by it being relied upon by persons . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3) HL 22-Mar-2001
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness
The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI.
Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also . .
CitedKampelmann and others v Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe and others ECJ 4-Dec-1997
LMA The case concerned Directive 91/533 on employers’ obligations to inform employees of the conditions applicable to their contract or employment relationship. An ’emanation of state’ was understood to be . .
CitedCotter and others v Minister for Social Welfare ECJ 13-Mar-1991
Europa Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC, on the prohibition of all discrimination on grounds of sex in matters of social security, must be interpreted as meaning that if, after the expiry of the period . .
CitedItaly v Council ECJ 14-Mar-2002
Europa The limit-date of 1 August for fixing the intervention price and derived intervention prices in Article 3(4) and (5) of Regulation No 1785/81 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector . .
CitedCommission v France C-481/98 ECJ 3-May-2001
Europa By introducing and maintaining in force legislation on Value Added Tax under which medicinal products reimbursable under the social security system are taxed at the reduced rate of 2.1% whereas other . .
CitedGoldsmiths (Jewellers) v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 3-Jul-1997
ECJ The derogation provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 11C(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 does not authorize a Member State which enacts provisions for the refund of VAT in the case of total or . .

Cited by:
Decision to refer to ECJMarks 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 . .
Decision to referMarks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 12-Jul-2006
Question referred to ECJ. Five questions were referred. . .
Decision to referMarks 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 . .
Decision to referMarks 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: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.229069

Loch Tay Highland Lodges Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 1 Feb 2004

VDT Sale of chalets or lodges in holiday development; restriction on use; not to be used as sole or main residence; whether zero rated or standard rated. VATA sections 30 Schedule 8 Group 5 Item 1 and Note 13.
[2004] UKVAT V18785
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCottage Holiday Associates Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners 1983
The taxpayer had been assessed to VAT on the supply of time share holiday cottages. The supply was of an eighty year lease to each tenant with the right to occupy for one week in each of the eighty years. The taxpayer argued that the supply . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 September 2021; Ref: scu.216475

Chaudhry v Revenue and Customs Commissioners: Admn 17 Jul 2007

The commissioners had served a notice on the taxpayer requiring him to pay security for his tax liabiities. He appealed out of time against the finding, and was prosecuted for having continued to trade without providing the security. He appealed.
Held: The appeal failed. The legislation made no provision for suspension of the requirement not to trade. A leaflet from the commissioners might have created a legitimate expectation that the trader could continue pending a proper appeal, but no such expectation was created where, as here, the appeal was lodged out of time.
Sedley LJ, Nelson J
Times 02-Aug-2007, [2007] EWHC 1805 (Admin)
Bailii
Value Added Tax Act 1994 72(11), Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 171(4)
England and Wales

Updated: 12 September 2021; Ref: scu.258526

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 comparator among domestic claims sufficient to engage the principle of equivalence in relation to the imposition of a pay-first requirement upon traders seeking to appeal assessments to VAT.
Lady Hale, President, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs
[2018] UKSC 44, [2018] STI 1496, [2018] WLR(D) 531, [2018] STC 1642, [2018] 1 WLR 4053, [2018] BVC 38, UKSC 2017/0023
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 Apr 25 am Video, SC 2018 Apr 25 pm Video, SC 2018 Apr 26 am Video
England and Wales
Citing:
At CATotel Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 20-Dec-2016
Claim that the UK’s VAT prepayments rule infringes European law. . .
CitedEdilizia Industriale Siderurgica v Ministero delle Finanze ECJ 15-Sep-1998
ECJ (Judgment) Recovery of sums paid but not due – Procedural time-limits under national law
Orse EDIS v Ministero delle Finanze . .
CitedLevez v T H Jennings (Harlow Pools) Ltd ECJ 1-Dec-1998
Regulations debarred a claim after a certain time even where the delay had been because of a deliberate concealment of information by an employer.
Held: Availability of other means of redress was not sufficient to displace this rule.
CitedRevenue and Customs v Stringer, Ainsworth and Others HL 10-Jun-2009
In each case, the employee had retired after long term sickness. The Employment tribunal had upheld their ability to claim arrears of sickness pay arising under the 1998 Regulations, as an unlawful deduction from their wages. They now appealed . .
CitedMarks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise Admn 21-Dec-1998
The limitation period for the recovery of overpaid VAT was alleged to offend the principle of equivalence.
Held: Moses J said: ‘In my judgment no comparison can be made with other types of tax such as income tax payable in respect of an . .
CitedPreston and Others v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust and Others, Fletcher and Others v Midland Bank Plc (No 2) HL 8-Feb-2001
Part-time workers claimed that they had been unlawfully excluded from occupational pension schemes because membership was dependent on an employee working a minimum number of hours per week and that that was discriminatory because a considerably . .
CitedCompass Contract Services (Taxation – Value Added Tax Taxation : Judgment) ECJ 14-Jun-2017
The case involved a comparison between different limitation periods applicable to claims to recover overpaid VAT, and claims to deduct input tax from VAT otherwise due, for the purposes of the equal treatment principle. The Fourth Chamber of the . .
CitedLittlewoods 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 . .
CitedReemtsma Cigarettenfabriken v Ministero delle Finanze ECJ 8-Jun-2006
It was alleged that a provision limiting the identity of those who could claim a VAT repayment offended against the principle of equivalence because there was no comparable restriction in relation to the recovery of overpaid direct tax.
Held: . .
CitedTransportes Urbanos Y Servicios Generales (Principles Of Community Law) ECJ 26-Jan-2010
(Grand chamber) Procedural autonomy of the Member States – Principle of equivalence – Action for damages against the State – Breach of European Union law – Breach of the Constitution . .
CitedVirginie Pontin v T-Comalux SA (Social Policy) ECJ 31-Mar-2009
ECJ Social policy – Protection of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding Directive 92/85/EEC Articles 10 and 12 Prohibition of dismissal from the beginning of pregnancy . .
CitedHM Revenue and Customs v Changtel Solutions UK Ltd CA 28-Jan-2015
The Court was asked whether, when there is both (i) an appeal against a VAT assessment pending in the tax tribunal, and (ii) a winding-up petition pending in the Companies court, the tax tribunal or the Companies court is the appropriate forum to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.620140

Marks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: Admn 21 Dec 1998

The limitation period for the recovery of overpaid VAT was alleged to offend the principle of equivalence.
Held: Moses J said: ‘In my judgment no comparison can be made with other types of tax such as income tax payable in respect of an individual’s profits or the tax on a document imposed by stamp duty. Other forms of indirect taxation, such as excise duty, are wholly different types of tax.
It seems to me that the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, exemplified in EDILIZIA, requires a comparison between the approach of a member state to the recovery of tax charged in breach of Community rules and the recovery of the same tax in breach of domestic rules. Any wider enquiry would invite unnecessary argument as to whether there is a true comparison.’
Moses J
[1998] EWHC 1143 (Admin), [1999] STC 205, [1999] Eu LR 450, [1999] 1 CMLR 1152, [1999] BTC 5073, [1999] BVC 107
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromMarks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise CA 14-Dec-1999
The taxpayer discovered that it had over several years made overpayments of VAT on chocolate covered biscuits because of a mistake as to the tax mutual with the defendants.
Held: MandS’s challenge to section 80(4) (as infringing EU law) . .
First instanceMarks 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 . .
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.280499

Littlewoods 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 billion pounds).
Held: ‘Since the scheme created by section 78 is inconsistent with the availability of concurrent common law claims to interest, it must therefore be interpreted as impliedly excluding such claims. The reservation set out in section 78(1) must therefore be construed as referring only to statutory liabilities to pay interest. So construed, section 78 impliedly excludes the claims made by Littlewoods, as a matter of English law, and without reference to EU law.’
The CJEU has given member state courts a discretion to provide reasonable redress in the form of interest in addition to the mandatory repayment of any wrongly levied tax, interest and penalties. We have three reasons for this view. First, the structure of the CJEU’s judgment itself and its choice of words support this conclusion. Secondly, the practice of member states in awarding interest on wrongly levied tax provides the context of the CJEU’s judgment and suggests that the court was not being as radical as the courts below have held. Thirdly, prior and subsequent case law of the CJEU is consistent with this interpretation.
There is nothing in the prior or subsequent case law of the CJEU which militates against the interpretation of its judgment in this case. Consistently with the views expressed by the European Commission and the member state governments which submitted arguments to the court in this case, the CJEU has not required the payment of more than simple interest if the national legal order treats that as reasonable redress for the unavailability of the money and no issue of equivalence arises. The CJEU’s reliance on the principles of effectiveness and equivalence is wholly consistent with its jurisprudence that the questions of the rate and method of calculation of interest are matters for the internal legal order of a member state.
Littlewoods had already recovered overpaid tax, and interest on that amount, going back several decades. The size of that recovery reflects a combination of circumstances which could not have occurred in most of the other EU member states: the retroactive nature of a major development of the common law by the courts, so as to allow for the first time the recovery of money paid under a mistake in law, and the inability of the legislature to respond to that development, under EU law, by retroactively altering the law of limitation so as to protect public finances. The resultant payment of interest cannot realistically be regarded as having deprived Littlewoods of an adequate indemnity, in the sense in which that expression should be interpreted.
Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge JJSC, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury and Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony
[2017] UKSC 70, [2018] AC 869, [2017] 3 WLR 1401, [2017] WLR(D) 744, [2018] 1 All ER 83, [2017] STC 2413, UKSC 2015/0178, UKSC 2015/0177
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2017 07 03 am Video, SC 2017 07 03 pm Video, SC 2017 07 04 am Video, SC 2017 07 04 pm Video
Value Added Tax Act 1994 94
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedWoolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2) HL 20-Jul-1992
The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. It paid money on account of the tax demanded. It won and recovered the sums paid, but the revenue refused to pay any interest accrued on the sums paid. . .
CitedRewe-Zentralfinanz eG v Landwirtschaftskammer fur das Saarland (Judgment) ECJ 16-Dec-1976
‘the right of individuals to rely on the directly effective provisions of the Treaty before national courts is only a minimum guarantee and is not sufficient in itself to ensure the full and complete implementation of the Treaty’ . .
CitedDeutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another HL 25-Oct-2006
The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred.
Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when . .
At ChDThe Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue and Another ChD 14-Oct-2015
. .
Appeal from (CA)Littlewoods Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 21-May-2015
The company sought repayment by way of restitution for overpaid taxes. The tax had been repaid, but only as simple interest, and not compounded. Both parties now appealed from a decision that the Act did not apply to exclude under sections 78 and 80 . .
CitedSempra Metals Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another HL 18-Jul-2007
The parties agreed that damages were payable in an action for restitution, but the sum depended upon to a calculation of interest. They disputed whether such interest should be calculated on a simple or compound basis. The company sought compound . .
CitedTest Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue SC 23-May-2012
The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European . .
CitedLittlewoods 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 . .
CitedMarks 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 . .
CitedFleming (T/A Bodycraft) v Revenue and Customs HL 23-Jan-2008
The transitional rules introducing time limits for failing to deduct VAT inputs made insufficient allowance for the decisions in Marks and Spencer and Grundig.
Held: Lord Hope said: ‘To be compatible with EU law, taxpayers were entitled to be . .
At ChD (1)Littlewoods Retail Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs ChD 4-Nov-2010
Overpayments of VAT had been repaid with interest. The claimants suggested that the interest should have been compounded. The court had decided that a reference to the ECJ was necessary. The Court now considered the form of that reference.
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 . .
CitedFJ Chalke Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs ChD 8-May-2009
The court was asked as to the effectiveness under European law of sections 78 and 80 of the 1994 Act.
Held: Henderson J focused on the fact that section 80(7) excludes any common law liability to repay the overpaid VAT, and inferred that it . .
CitedHadley v Baxendale Exc 23-Feb-1854
Contract Damages; What follows the Breach Naturaly
The plaintiffs had sent a part of their milling machinery for repair. The defendants contracted to carry it, but delayed in breach of contract. The plaintiffs claimed damages for the earnings lost through the delay. The defendants appealed, saying . .
CitedLondon, Chatham and Dover Railway Co v South Eastern Railway Co HL 1893
The Lord Chancellor was considering the position of a creditor whose debtor refused to exchange accounts as agreed, thus preventing the creditor from quantifying the debt.
Held: The House declined to alter the rule in Page -v- Newman.
CitedJohnson v The King PC 22-Jun-1904
(Sierra Leone) For restitutionary claims, an action for money had and received only the net sum could be recovered. . .
CitedLittlewoods Retail Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs (No 2) ChD 28-Mar-2014
The claimants had recovered very substantial overpayments made of VAT. They sought recovery of compound interest. The ECJ, on reference, said that this was a matter for national law.
Held: The claim succeeded. The sections of the 1994 Act were . .
CitedRoyal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom v Department of Health and Social Security HL 2-Jan-1981
The court was asked whether nurses could properly involve themselves in a pregnancy termination procedure not known when the Act was passed, and in particular, whether a pregnancy was ‘terminated by a medical practitioner’, when it was carried out . .
CitedPresident of India v La Pintada Compagnia Navigacia SA (‘La Pintada’) HL 1985
The house decided against altering the rule in Page -v- Newman. ‘The common law does not award general damages for delay in payment of a debt beyond the date when it is contractually due’ The power given to the court under s 35A is discretionary. It . .
CitedAmministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato v Spa San Giorgio ECJ 9-Nov-1983
ECJ Questions submitted for a preliminary ruling – reference to the court – right of every national court – stage of the proceedings before the national court – nature of the decision to be given by the national . .
CitedZuckerfabrik Julich AG v Hauptzollamt Aachen ECJ 22-Nov-2012
(Opinion) Rectification of the judgment . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .
CitedMetallgesellschaft Ltd and Others v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another Hoechst Ag and Another v Same ECJ 8-Mar-2001
The British law which meant that non-resident parent companies of British based businesses were not able to recover interest on payments of advance corporation tax, was discriminatory against other European based companies. Accordingly the law was . .
CitedIrimie v Administratia Finantelor Publice Sibiu And Administratia Fondului Pentru Mediu ECJ 18-Apr-2013
Repayment of taxes levied by a Member State in breach of European Union law – National system limiting the interest payable by the Member State on the repaid tax – Interest calculated from the day following the date of the claim for repayment of the . .
CitedM H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) ECJ 26-Feb-1986
ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority’s provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that . .
CitedPalmisani v Instituto Nazionale della Previdenze Sociale (INPS) ECJ 10-Jul-1997
(Judgment) (Rec 1997,p I-4025) Social policy – Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer – Council Directive 80/987/EEC – Liability of a Member State arising from belated transposition of a directive – Adequate . .
CitedFantask and others v Industriministeriet ECJ 2-Dec-1997
ECJ Directive 69/335/EEC – Registration charges on companies – Procedural time-limits under national law. . .
CitedWortmann KG Internationale Schuhproduktionen v Hauptzollamt Bielefeld ECJ 18-Jan-2017
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs Union and Common Customs Tariff – Reimbursement of import duties – Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (Customs Code) – Article 241, first paragraph, first . .
CitedTest Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v CIR ECJ 12-Dec-2006
ECJ (Opinion of Geelhoed AG) Interpretation of Articles 43 and 56 EC and Articles 4(1) and 6 of Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent . .

Cited by:
See AlsoFranked Investment Income Group, Non-Test Claimants In The Litigation v Inland Revenue and Another ChD 31-Jul-2019
Two additional issues that arise in the claims of certain non-test claimants in the long-running Franked Investment Income Group Litigation under the group litigation order known as the FII GLO. . .
CitedPrudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 25-Jul-2018
PAC sought to recover excess advance corporation tax paid under a UK system contrary to EU law. It was now agreed that some was repayable but now the quantum. Five issues separated the parties.
Issue I: does EU law require the tax credit to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.598454

Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-259/10: ECJ 10 Nov 2011

ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice departing from the legislative provisions – ‘Due diligence’ defence
C-259/10, [2011] EUECJ C-259/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:719, [2011] ECR I-10947, [2012] CEC 884, [2011] STI 3045, [2011] BVC 389, [2012] STC 23
Bailii
European
Citing:
At VDT (1)The Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs VDT 27-May-2008
VDT EXEMPT SUPPLIES – Gaming – Mechanised cash bingo under Gaming Act 1968 s.14 excluded from exemption – Similar supplies under s.21 exempt – Whether principle of fiscal neutrality infringed – Same company . .
At VDT (2)Rank Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 19-Aug-2008
VDT COMMUNITY LAW – Fiscal neutrality – Exemption – Gaming – Provision of gaming machines excluded from exemption – Similar supplies under Part III of Gaming Act 1968 exempt – Whether principle of fiscal . .
At ChDRevenue and Customs v The Rank Group ChD 8-Jun-2009
The court was asked whether the VAT treatment of mechanised cash bingo breaches the principle of fiscal neutrality: and the core issue on the appeal is whether the burden lay on Rank to adduce evidence to prove not only that there was a difference . .
At FTTTxThe Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 11-Dec-2009
FTTTx Community Law – Fiscal neutrality – Exemption – Exclusion of provision of ‘gaming machines’ from exemption – Whether taxed machines similar to exempt machines – Relevance of regulatory regime – TNT [2009] . .
See AlsoCommissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-260/10 ECJ 10-Nov-2011
ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice . .

Cited by:
At ECJ (2)HMRC v The Rank Group Plc UTTC 4-Oct-2012
Taxation – whether gaming or betting and the different VAT Treatment of newer gaming machines. . .
At ECJ (2)HM Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc CA 30-Oct-2013
The tax payer had sought repayment of sums of VAT charged to a particular form of gaming, saying that the rules infringed the principles of fiscal neutrality under European law. HMRC now appealed against a finding that the machines were exempt from . .
At ECJ (2)Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc SC 8-Jul-2015
The question raised by this appeal is whether, during the period 1 October 2002 to 5 December 2005, the takings on a particular category of gaming machines operated by the appellants were subject to VAT. The answer depends on whether the takings . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v Taylor Clark Leisure Plc SC 11-Jul-2018
Several companies within a group paid VAT. Later the basis of charge to output VAT was revised, and a reclaim became due, but the VAT group had been dissolved. Could the appellant, former lead within the group now make the reclaim.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.448353

Revenue and Customs v Taylor Clark Leisure Plc: SC 11 Jul 2018

Several companies within a group paid VAT. Later the basis of charge to output VAT was revised, and a reclaim became due, but the VAT group had been dissolved. Could the appellant, former lead within the group now make the reclaim.
Held: HMRC’s appeal succeeded. The European legislation allowed but did not oblige countries to introduce Group scheme. The UK scheme allowed the lead to reclaim on behalf of members, rather than creating the group as a quasi person, and that concept was an unnecessary complication. The VAT refund was due to the payer of the VAT, but the company had long since ceased to be a member of the group, and the group payer no longer represented or was agent for the claimant company.
Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs
[2018] UKSC 35, 2018 SC (UKSC) 153, [2018] WLR(D) 443, 2018 SLT 1091, [2018] 4 All ER 817, [2018] 1 WLR 3803, 2018 GWD 23-297, [2018] STC 1556, [2018] BVC 34, [2018] STI 1415, UKSC 2016/0204
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 Apr 11 am Video, Bailii 2018 Apr 11 pm Vid
Finance Act 2008 121, Value Added Tax Act 1994 43(1)
Scotland
Citing:
At FTTTxTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 19-Dec-2012
FTTTx VAT – Preliminary Issues; Fleming claims; time bar; group registration; effect of leaving group; effect of disbandment; whether timeous claim by a former member of group entitles the representative member . .
At UTTCTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v Revenue and Customs UTTC 8-Sep-2014
VAT – Fleming claims – Preliminary Issues – Time-bar: construction of VATA 1994, s. 80 – Entitlement: whether right to repayment assigned; whether right capable of assignation; VATA 1994, s. 43. . .
SCS LeaveTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v HM Revenue and Customs SCS 24-Apr-2015
The applicant seeks leave to appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber). . .
Appeal from refusal of leaveTaylor Clark Leisure Plc and Revenue and Customs Against A Decision of and Refusal of Leave To Appeal By The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) SCS 26-May-2015
Extra Division, Inner House Court of Session – appeal from a decision of and refusal of leave to appeal by the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) – reclaim of overdeclared VAT outputs . .
Appeal from (SCS)Taylor Clark Leisure Plc v A Decision of The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) SCS 14-Jul-2016
Can the VAT group embodied in the appellant as representative member rely on those claims for repayment of VAT overpaid by the group, when the claims were made timeously but by another member of the VAT group rather than the representative member? . .
CitedCommissioners 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 . .
CitedCommissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-259/10 ECJ 10-Nov-2011
ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice . .
CitedFleming (T/A Bodycraft) v Revenue and Customs HL 23-Jan-2008
The transitional rules introducing time limits for failing to deduct VAT inputs made insufficient allowance for the decisions in Marks and Spencer and Grundig.
Held: Lord Hope said: ‘To be compatible with EU law, taxpayers were entitled to be . .
CitedLinneweber (Taxation) ECJ 17-Feb-2005
Sixth VAT Directive – Exemption for games of chance – Determination of the conditions and limitations to which the exemption is subject – Liability of games organised outside public casinos – Respect for the principle of fiscal neutrality – Article . .
CitedAmpliscientifica Srl, Amplifin SpA v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Entrate (Taxation) ECJ 22-May-2008
ECJ Sixth VAT directive – Taxable persons Second subparagraph of Article 4(4) Parent companies and subsidiaries – Implementation by the Member State of the single taxable person scheme Conditions Consequences.
CitedRevenue and Customs v BMW (UK) Holdings Ltd UTTC 19-Oct-2016
UTTC VAT – grouping – claim for overpaid tax where company leaves VAT group – correct entity to make claim – last representative member – first appeal (BMW/MGR) allowed; second and third appeals (Lloyds/Standard . .
CitedSkandia America Corporation ECJ 17-Sep-2014
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – VAT group – Internal invoicing for services supplied by a main company with its seat in a third country to its branch belonging to a VAT group within a . .
ApprovedStandard Chartered Plc and Others v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 31-Mar-2014
VAT – claims under s 80 VATA – VAT groups – Art 4(4), Sixth Directive (Art 11, Principal VAT Directive) – s 43 VATA – entitlement to claim – effect of individual taxable member joining a VAT group on VAT overpayments arising prior to that event – . .
CitedKeighley, Maxsted and Co v Durant HL 20-May-1901
Lord Lindley said: ‘The explanation of the doctrine that an undisclosed principal can sue and be sued on a contract made in the name of another person with his authority is, that the contract is in truth, although not in form, that of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.619947

Revenue and Customs v BMW (UK) Holdings Ltd: UTTC 19 Oct 2016

UTTC VAT – grouping – claim for overpaid tax where company leaves VAT group – correct entity to make claim – last representative member – first appeal (BMW/MGR) allowed; second and third appeals (Lloyds/Standard Chartered) dismissed
The Tribunal described the position of the representative member: ‘The representative member of section 43 must, in our view, be understood as a continuing entity (perhaps akin to a corporation sole whose role is fulfilled by whoever holds the relevant office at any time). Thus actions, liabilities and rights of an old representative member must be ascribed to the new representative member on a change of representative member.’
Warren J and Hellier J
[2016] UKUT 434 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRevenue and Customs v Taylor Clark Leisure Plc SC 11-Jul-2018
Several companies within a group paid VAT. Later the basis of charge to output VAT was revised, and a reclaim became due, but the VAT group had been dissolved. Could the appellant, former lead within the group now make the reclaim.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.570431

Taylor Clark Leisure Plc and Revenue and Customs Against A Decision of and Refusal of Leave To Appeal By The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber): SCS 26 May 2015

Extra Division, Inner House Court of Session – appeal from a decision of and refusal of leave to appeal by the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) – reclaim of overdeclared VAT outputs
Lady Clark of Calton
[2015] ScotCS CSIH – 40, 2015 SLT 412, [2015] BVC 27, 2015 GWD 20-356
Bailii
Scotland
Citing:
At FTTTxTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 19-Dec-2012
FTTTx VAT – Preliminary Issues; Fleming claims; time bar; group registration; effect of leaving group; effect of disbandment; whether timeous claim by a former member of group entitles the representative member . .
At UTTCTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v Revenue and Customs UTTC 8-Sep-2014
VAT – Fleming claims – Preliminary Issues – Time-bar: construction of VATA 1994, s. 80 – Entitlement: whether right to repayment assigned; whether right capable of assignation; VATA 1994, s. 43. . .
SCS – LeaveTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v HM Revenue and Customs SCS 24-Apr-2015
The applicant seeks leave to appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber). . .

Cited by:
Appeal from refusal of leaveTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v HM Revenue and Customs SCS 14-Jul-2016
(Extra Division – Inner house) Reclaim of overdeclared VAT outputs by former representative member of now dissolved VAT group. . .
Appeal from refusal of leaveTaylor Clark Leisure Plc v A Decision of The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) SCS 14-Jul-2016
Can the VAT group embodied in the appellant as representative member rely on those claims for repayment of VAT overpaid by the group, when the claims were made timeously but by another member of the VAT group rather than the representative member? . .
Appeal from refusal of leaveRevenue and Customs v Taylor Clark Leisure Plc SC 11-Jul-2018
Several companies within a group paid VAT. Later the basis of charge to output VAT was revised, and a reclaim became due, but the VAT group had been dissolved. Could the appellant, former lead within the group now make the reclaim.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.547651

Minister Finansow v Rr Donnelley Global Turnkey Solutions Poland Sp. ZOO: ECJ 27 Jun 2013

ECJ VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 44 and 47 – Place where taxable transactions are deemed to be carried out – Place of supply for tax purposes – Concept of ‘supply of services connected with immovable property’ – Complex cross-border service relating to the storage of goods
[2013] EUECJ C-155/12, [2013] BVC 342, [2013] STI 2473, [2014] STC 131, ECLI:EU:C:2013:434
Bailii
European
Citing:
OpinionMinister Finansow v Rr Donnelley Global Turnkey Solutions Poland Sp. ZOO ECJ 31-Jan-2013
ECJ Tax legislation – Value added tax – Article 47 of Directive 2006/112/EC – Place where a service is supplied – Service connected with immovable property – Storage of goods . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 July 2021; Ref: scu.564505

Barkas v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Mar 2013

FTTtx VAT – DIY residential conversion scheme – conversion of commercial unit comprising two separate buildings into a ‘live/work’ unit – one building converted to residential dwelling – planning permission restricting operation/use of remaining commercial building to occupiers of dwelling – whether the dwelling was ‘designed as a dwelling’ – Note 2(c) to Item 4, Group 5, Schedule 8 Value Added Tax Act 1994 – whether the planning permission prohibited the separate use or disposal of the dwelling – held no – appeal allowed
Poole J
[2013] UKFTT 186 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 09 July 2021; Ref: scu.472393

Revenue and Customs v Colaingrove Ltd: UTTC 21 Mar 2014

Value Added Tax – zero-rating – static caravans in Group 9 of Schedule 8 to Value Added Tax Act 1994 – meaning of ‘removable contents’ – Item 4 of Group 5 of Schedule 8 – meaning of ‘building materials’ – meaning of ‘fitted furniture’
[2014] UKUT 132 (TCC), [2014] BVC 519, [2014] STI 1767, [2014] STC 1457
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.525878

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.
Times 20-Jul-1995
Value Added Tax Act 1983 40(1)(n)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromJohn Dee Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise QBD 17-Feb-1995
VAT Tribunal has an appellate not a supervisory jurisdiction – no re-hearing. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 June 2021; Ref: scu.82533

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.
Gazette 27-Mar-1996, Gazette 08-Nov-1995, Times 20-Oct-1995, Ind Summary 13-Nov-1995
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromHouse (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. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 June 2021; Ref: scu.81493

HM Revenue and Customs v Begum and Others: ChD 15 Jul 2010

The Commissioners claim was founded in an alleged conspiracy from a ‘missing trader intra-community fraud’ amounting to andpound;96 million.
Held: Section 423 had extra territorial effect.
David Richards J
[2010] EWHC 1799 (Ch), [2011] BPIR 59
Bailii
Insolvency Act 1986 423
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegalway Care Ltd v Shillingford and others ChD 25-Feb-2005
Applications to vary freezing order. Blackburne J set out a description of the workings of missing trader intra-community VAT carousel frauds. . .

Cited by:
CitedBilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others ChD 30-Jul-2012
The company was said to have engaged in a fraud based on false European Trading Scheme Allowances, and had been wound up by the Revenue. The liquidators, in the company name, now sought recovery from former directors and associates.
Held: The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 May 2021; Ref: scu.420810

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Civil Service Motoring Association: CA 10 Dec 1997

The exemption from VAT for the making of credit arrangements extends to the surrounding activities; not just the making of arrangement.
Times 10-Dec-1997, [1998] STC 111
Value Added Tax Act 1983 Sch 6 Group 5
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Civil Service Motoring Association Ltd Admn 24-Jan-1997
. .

Cited by:
CitedCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Institute of Directors, BAA Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 11-Dec-2002
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 . .
Appealed toCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Civil Service Motoring Association Ltd Admn 24-Jan-1997
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2021; Ref: scu.79324

Minister Finansow v Rr Donnelley Global Turnkey Solutions Poland Sp. ZOO: ECJ 31 Jan 2013

ECJ Tax legislation – Value added tax – Article 47 of Directive 2006/112/EC – Place where a service is supplied – Service connected with immovable property – Storage of goods
Kokott AG
C-155/12, [2013] EUECJ C-155/12
Bailii
Cited by:
OpinionMinister Finansow v Rr Donnelley Global Turnkey Solutions Poland Sp. ZOO ECJ 27-Jun-2013
ECJ VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 44 and 47 – Place where taxable transactions are deemed to be carried out – Place of supply for tax purposes – Concept of ‘supply of services connected with immovable . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2021; Ref: scu.470792

Revenue and Customs v Newey (T/A Ocean Finance): CA 17 Apr 2018

The court was asked whether the EU law doctrine of abuse of law applies in circumstances where the respondent taxpayer, Mr Newey, who had previously carried on a successful loan-broking business in partnership in the United Kingdom under the trading name of ‘Ocean Finance’, took steps to incorporate and restructure the business in Jersey, outside the EU and outside the normal territorial scope of value added tax (‘VAT’).
[2018] EWCA Civ 791, [2018] BVC 19, [2018] STC 1054
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 23 April 2021; Ref: scu.608725

Zipvit Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 29 Jun 2018

[2018] EWCA Civ 1515, [2018] 1 WLR 5729, [2018] STC 1502, [2018] BVC 29, [2018] WLR(D) 404, [2018] STI 1455
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
At FTTTxZipvit Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 3-Jul-2014
FTTTx VAT – supply of individually negotiated postal services treated by all parties as exempt from VAT – customer seeking to reclaim input VAT on supply from HMRC – whether services standard rated under . .
At UTTCZipvit Ltd v Revenue and Customs UTTC 27-Jun-2016
UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – Is the appellant entitled to recover VAT input tax in respect of MailmediaR supplies to it from Royal Mail, notwithstanding that Royal Mail did not in fact pay VAT on those supplies, the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 April 2021; Ref: scu.618932

Gemini Riteway Scaffolding Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Jun 2012

VALUE ADDED TAX – incorrect self-billed invoice – whether liability for understated tax is on the customer or the supplier – held it is on the supplier absent a notice under section 29 VATA – whether the assessment for the understated tax made on the supplier could be successfully appealed against on the basis that HMRC should have (but did not) exercise their power to serve notice under section 29 – held it could not – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 369 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462799

Ps Gill and Son (Uk) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 21 May 2012

FTTTx VAT – MTIC fraud – contra trading – whether fraudulent VAT evasion established – only in relation to some defaults – whether connection to fraud established – yes, both directly and through contra trader – whether Appellant should have known of the connection – yes – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 374 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462759

The Peoples Dispensary for Sick Animals (Pdsa) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 31 May 2012

FTTTx VAT – Input Tax – The Appellant a ‘not for profit’ incorporated Society providing welfare and charitable services for sick and injured animals – Was the Appellant entitled to recover VAT on veterinary fees – No – The Pet Aid scheme was a non-economic activity – the veterinary supplies made to the pet owners not to the Appellant – Appeal dismissed
Judge Michael Tildesley OBE, Mohammed Farooq
[2012] UKFTT 362 (TC), [2012] STI 2521, [2012] SFTD 1142
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462758

Granger v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 10 May 2012

FTTTx VAT – ASSESSMENT – Unexplained discrepancies between SAGE records and VAT returns – No evidence substantiating some of the Appellant’s input tax claims – Assessment derived from the figures in the SAGE records – HMRC’s assessment rational and reasonable – Misdeclaration penalty correctly calculated – no mitigating circumstances – Appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 373 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462742

Walker v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 27 Mar 2012

VAT PENALTY – section 60 Value Added Tax 1994 penalty- appellant’s dishonest repayment claim of pounds 60,038 – no invoices or other evidence to justify repayment – costs awarded against the appellant arising from her failure to respond to correspondence from the respondents or to attend the hearing.
[2012] UKFTT 226 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462646

Gosling Leisure Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 5 Mar 2012

Value Added Tax – Whether capital costs, incurred by the Appellant, were directly and immediately related to supplies made by the Appellant, so as to rank as deductible input tax – how supplies under a licence, rather than a lease or sub-lease were treated for VAT purposes – how to deal with a relatively minor category of supplies made by the Appellant to its parent company – decision in principle – Appeal allowed
[2012] UKFTT 170 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462614

Koninklijke Ahold v Staatssecretaris van Financi: ECJ 10 Jul 2008

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling First and Sixth VAT directives – Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality – Rules concerning rounding of amounts of VAT Rounding down per item
[2008] EUECJ C-484/06, C-484/06
Bailii
European
Citing:
OpinionKoninklijke Ahold v Staatssecretaris van Financi ECJ 24-Jan-2008
(Opinion) The court considered the application of rounding procedures to VAT. Two issues arose: whether rounding was to be applied on a per item or per receipt basis and whether the matter was governed by national or Uuropean laws.
Held: There . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 April 2021; Ref: scu.460497