Commissioners for Customs and Excise v Upton [2002] EWCA Civ 520 (18th April, 2002)

Commissioners for Customs and Excise v Upton [2002] EWCA Civ 520 (18th April, 2002)

A sole trader who acquires a car and retains control over it, without imposing legal or physical restrictions on private use, is deemed to have intended to make it available for private use under Article 7(2G)(b), regardless of his actual intention to use it privately. Therefore, the statutory condition for input tax deduction is not satisfied.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 520
Parties
Respondent: Commissioners for Customs and Excise; Appellant: Christopher Upton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
VAT Input Tax Deduction Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Value Added Tax, Input Tax Deduction, Statutory Interpretation, Business Use of Motor Vehicles
Tax Law European Union Law Value Added Tax Input Tax Deduction Statutory Interpretation Business Use of Motor Vehicles

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioners for Customs and Excise

Respondent

Christopher Upton

Appellant

Procedural Posture

VAT Input Tax Deduction Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a sole trader who acquires a motor car for exclusive business use intends to 'make it available' for private use under the Value Added Tax (Input Tax) Order 1992 as amended by the 1995 Order, Article 7(2G)(b)
  2. 2 Proper construction of 'make it available' for private use in the context of VAT input tax deduction

Ratio Decidendi

A sole trader who acquires a car and retains control over it, without imposing legal or physical restrictions on private use, is deemed to have intended to make it available for private use under Article 7(2G)(b), regardless of his actual intention to use it privately. Therefore, the statutory condition for input tax deduction is not satisfied.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs