Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The appellant did not maintain a stock book or compliant invoices as required by law, and therefore was not entitled to use the VAT margin scheme. HMRC's assessments based on gross sales were valid and made to the best of their judgment.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal dismissed ESL’s appeal against HMRC closure notices, finding its waste-handling projects did not amount to R&D and the claimed expenditure was not proved.
The Upper Tribunal refused reconsideration of permission to appeal in a tax dispute, holding there was no arguable error in the FTT’s treatment of an HMRC barring application.
The Upper Tribunal refused Mr Wardle’s application for a protective costs order in HMRC’s appeal, finding no real public interest and no basis for an appeal costs order.
First-tier Tribunal held HMRC reasonably required PAYE and NIC security, but fixed a 60-day compliance period for the appellants.
The High Court held that VAT on the relevant costs could be recovered by the first defendant’s liquidators under VAT Regulations 1995 reg. 111(5), and awarded the claimants £1,000 for the VAT submissions.
It is just and equitable to wind up Purity Limited in the public interest under section 85 of the Finance Act 2022 due to substantial detriment to public revenue, lack of transparency, and continuation of a previous tax avoidance business, and compulsory liquidation is appropriate despite existing voluntary liquidation to ensure proper investigation and deterrence.
Source excerpt
All three late appeals are admitted because, despite serious and significant delays, the circumstances—including the change of advisers, the collaborative and informal approach between the parties, and the lack of prejudice to HMRC—make it disproportionate to deny the Appellant the opportunity to challenge the penalties and assessment. The Tribunal applied the stricter Martland approach and found that, on balance, the appeals should be admitted.
Source excerpt
The tribunal refused Mr Paul Bryan’s application to direct HMRC to issue closure notices for open income tax enquiries, finding HMRC still had reasonable grounds to continue.
The Upper Tribunal held that dip pots in a takeaway meal deal are separate zero-rated supplies, and allowed Queenscourt’s VAT appeal.
Explore more
