Revenue And Customs v Sunico A/S & Ors [2013] EWHC 941 (Ch) (19 April 2013)

Revenue And Customs v Sunico A/S & Ors [2013] EWHC 941 (Ch) (19 April 2013)

The court found that Sunico and the controlling mind, Sunil Harwani, were parties to an unlawful means conspiracy to commit MTIC VAT fraud, as evidenced by the structure of the sample transaction chains, the role of Sunico as supplier and recipient of proceeds, and the absence of any credible innocent explanation....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 941 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs; Defendant: Sunico A/S; Defendant: Sunil Kumar Harwani; Defendant: Mangharam Harwani; Defendant: Abascus Holding ApS (formerly Sunico Holding ApS); Defendant: M&B Holding A/S; Defendant: PT Naina Exim Indo; Defendant: Hashu Dhalomal Shahdadpuri
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim (chancery Division) / Judgment After Trial of Liability on Sample Transaction Chains
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant (HMRC) on liability for unlawful means conspiracy in respect of the sample transaction chains.
Legal Topics
Unlawful Means Conspiracy, VAT Fraud, Missing Trader Intra Community (mtic) Fraud, Damages, Disclosure, Adverse Inferences, Evidentiary Issues
Commercial Law Tax Law Tort Law Private International Law Unlawful Means Conspiracy VAT Fraud Missing Trader Intra Community (mtic) Fraud Damages +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Claimant

Sunico A/S

Defendant

Sunil Kumar Harwani

Defendant

Mangharam Harwani

Defendant

Abascus Holding ApS (formerly Sunico Holding ApS)

Defendant

M&B Holding A/S

Defendant

PT Naina Exim Indo

Defendant

Hashu Dhalomal Shahdadpuri

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim (chancery Division) / Judgment After Trial of Liability on Sample Transaction Chains

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants were parties to an unlawful means conspiracy to commit MTIC VAT fraud
  2. 2 Whether HMRC suffered loss as a result of the alleged conspiracy in the sample transaction chains
  3. 3 Whether the documentary and witness evidence establishes the Defendants' participation in the fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Sunico and the controlling mind, Sunil Harwani, were parties to an unlawful means conspiracy to commit MTIC VAT fraud, as evidenced by the structure of the sample transaction chains, the role of Sunico as supplier and recipient of proceeds, and the absence of any credible innocent explanation. The court drew adverse inferences from the Defendants' failure to call key witnesses and found the documentary evidence sufficient to establish liability for conspiracy and loss in the sample chains.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant (HMRC) on liability for unlawful means conspiracy in respect of the sample transaction chains.

Orders

  • Defendants held liable for damages to be assessed in subsequent proceedings.
  • Costs reserved or to be determined.