Earthshine Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2011] UKFTT 667 (TC) (20 October 2011)

Earthshine Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2011] UKFTT 667 (TC) (20 October 2011)

Earthshine's transactions were connected to fraudulent tax loss and Earthshine knew or ought to have known of this connection; input tax recovery is denied under the Kittel principle as adopted in English law.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] UKFTT 667
Parties
Appellant: Earthshine Ltd (In Liquidation); Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
20 October 2011
Procedural Posture
VAT Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
VAT Fraud, MTIC Fraud, Input Tax Recovery, Burden of Proof, Standard of Proof, Pleading Requirements, Admissibility of Evidence
Tax Law European Union Law VAT Fraud MTIC Fraud Input Tax Recovery Burden of Proof Standard of Proof Pleading Requirements +1 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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Earthshine Ltd (In Liquidation)

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

VAT Appeal / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Earthshine's transactions were connected to fraudulent tax loss
  2. 2 Whether Earthshine knew or ought to have known of the connection to fraud
  3. 3 Whether HMRC pleaded knowledge with sufficient particularity

Ratio Decidendi

Earthshine's transactions were connected to fraudulent tax loss and Earthshine knew or ought to have known of this connection; input tax recovery is denied under the Kittel principle as adopted in English law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Earthshine Ltd is denied recovery of input tax totalling £303,646.35 for the transactions at issue.
  • No further relief granted to the Appellant.