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 tribunal dismissed ITS Plant-Tech’s VAT appeal, finding the payroll companies provided payroll administration only and not taxable labour supply.
HMRC’s strike out application was refused because the VAT appeal still raised arguable factual disputes about output tax and input tax recovery.
VAT appeal on EV charging: the tribunal held public charge-point electricity can, in principle, fall within Note 5(g) and the reduced rate.
AAC and VTL acted as principals, not agents; supplies from ETL were taxable and subject to VAT; reverse charge provisions applied and were not operated; input tax deduction not allowed due to lack of valid invoices or alternative evidence; behaviour was deliberate and attributable to Mr Javaid; penalties and assessments upheld.
Source excerpt
The costs incurred in the creation of product specific photographs are used exclusively in the making of taxable supplies of retail goods. Any link to credit or insurance is indirect and insufficient to establish a direct and immediate link. The photographs do not reference or promote exempt supplies, and their use alongside information about finance options does not convert them into mixed-use costs. The appeal is allowed and input tax is recoverable in full.
Source excerpt
The tribunal partly allowed VAT fraud appeals for pre-28 July 2022 transactions, but upheld later denial, deregistration, and penalties, reducing the officer penalty.
The VAT assessment was made to best judgment based on empirical evidence available at the time. The appellants failed to provide credible admissible evidence to displace the assessment or demonstrate overcharge. The company penalty was validly imposed for deliberate inaccuracies in VAT returns attributable to the second appellant. The PLN was validly imposed as the deliberate inaccuracy was attributable to the second appellant, and insolvency is not a statutory prerequisite for its issuance.
Source excerpt
OCC and Mr McGrail knew or should have known that their transactions with payroll providers were connected with VAT fraud. Due diligence was inadequate and only improved after HMRC’s investigation commenced. All payroll payments for the relevant periods were connected to fraud. The conditions for denial of input tax, company penalty, officer penalty, and VAT deregistration are satisfied.
Source excerpt
The assessments were validly raised within statutory time limits. There was no contract between Atena and service users; contracts existed only between Atena and GCHS, and between GCHS and service users. GCHS's CQC registration did not render supplies exempt under the reverse charge mechanism. The supply from Atena was one of staff, not welfare services. GCHS had no reasonable excuse for failure to notify HMRC of VAT obligations, as they did not take reasonable care to verify their VAT position.
Source excerpt
The Upper Tribunal held that VAT was due on sale of Lycamobile plan bundles, not only when allowances were used, and that the bundles were not vouchers.
Explore more
