Agents supplied facilities used for a telephone betting company. The services did not include the taking of any money or the settling of odds or otherwise.
Held: The services were not exempt.
Judges:
Ferris J
Citations:
[2003] STC 223, [2002] EWHC 2811 (Ch)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – United Utilities Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 8-Mar-2004
The taxpayer offered telephone gambling services through a local agent who did not accept money or set any odds.
Held: The services of the agents were administrative only, and not gambling services. There could be no principle to say that a . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – United Utilities Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 8-Mar-2004
The taxpayer offered telephone gambling services through a local agent who did not accept money or set any odds.
Held: The services of the agents were administrative only, and not gambling services. There could be no principle to say that a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
VAT
Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.200441
