Celltec Computers Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 155 (TC) (25 February 2013)

Celltec Computers Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 155 (TC) (25 February 2013)

It was open to HMRC to defend its decision on Deal 1 on the basis of no supply, and the facts established there was no supply. Alternatively, even if there was a supply, the Appellant's claim to recover input tax was properly denied on Kittel grounds, as the Appellant knew or ought to have known all seven deals were connected to VAT fraud.

Citation
[2013] UKFTT 155
Parties
Appellant: Celltec Computers Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
25 February 2013
Procedural Posture
VAT Appeal (mtic) / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Input Tax, Missing Trader Intra Community (mtic) Fraud, Kittel Principle, Knowledge or Means of Knowledge, Supply of Goods, VAT Repayment Claims
Tax Law VAT Law Input Tax Missing Trader Intra Community (mtic) Fraud Kittel Principle Knowledge or Means of Knowledge Supply of Goods VAT Repayment Claims

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Celltec Computers Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

VAT Appeal (mtic) / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC could deny input tax on Kittel grounds by later contending there was no supply in Deal 1
  2. 2 Whether there was a supply in Deal 1
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant knew or ought to have known its transactions were connected to VAT fraud

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to HMRC to defend its decision on Deal 1 on the basis of no supply, and the facts established there was no supply. Alternatively, even if there was a supply, the Appellant's claim to recover input tax was properly denied on Kittel grounds, as the Appellant knew or ought to have known all seven deals were connected to VAT fraud.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Input tax repayment claims for all seven deals are denied.