JSM Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - INPUT TAX : Evidence for claim) [2016] UKFTT 163 (TC) (08 March 2016)

JSM Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - INPUT TAX : Evidence for claim) [2016] UKFTT 163 (TC) (08 March 2016)

The Tribunal refused the strike out application, finding that while there was some evasiveness and embarrassment in the Appellant's witnesses' conduct, the witness statement in question was not materially false or supportive of the Appellant's case, and the conduct did not preclude a fair hearing. The Tribunal allowed the Respondents to amend their Statement of Case and file new witness statements, and granted the Appellant an adjournment to respond to the new case.

Citation
[2016] UKFTT 163 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: JSM Construction Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 March 2016
Procedural Posture
VAT Appeal / Preliminary Applications on Strike Out and Amendment
Outcome
Strike out application refused; applications to amend Statement of Case, file new witness statements, and adjourn proceedings all allowed.
Legal Topics
VAT, Input Tax, Tribunal Procedure, Evidence, Strike Out Applications
Tax Law VAT Input Tax Tribunal Procedure Evidence Strike Out Applications

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JSM Construction Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

VAT Appeal / Preliminary Applications on Strike Out and Amendment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant's appeal should be struck out for reliance on an allegedly false witness statement
  2. 2 Whether the Respondents should be permitted to amend their Statement of Case and file new witness statements
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant should be granted an adjournment if amendments are allowed

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal refused the strike out application, finding that while there was some evasiveness and embarrassment in the Appellant's witnesses' conduct, the witness statement in question was not materially false or supportive of the Appellant's case, and the conduct did not preclude a fair hearing. The Tribunal allowed the Respondents to amend their Statement of Case and file new witness statements, and granted the Appellant an adjournment to respond to the new case.

Court Disposition

Strike out application refused; applications to amend Statement of Case, file new witness statements, and adjourn proceedings all allowed.

Orders

  • Strike out application refused.
  • Respondents permitted to file new Statement of Case and witness statements.