Roma II Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2010] UKFTT 243 (TC) (27 May 2010)

Roma II Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2010] UKFTT 243 (TC) (27 May 2010)

The appellant's transaction was connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT, and the appellant, through its director Mr Nayar, should have known of this connection given the circumstances, lack of commerciality, inadequate due diligence, and prior warnings about MTIC fraud. Therefore, the appellant is denied the right to recover input tax on the transaction.

Citation
[2010] UKFTT 243 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Roma II Ltd; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
27 May 2010
Procedural Posture
VAT Input Tax Appeal (mtic Fraud) / First Tier Tribunal (tax), Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
VAT, Input Tax Recovery, MTIC Fraud, Due Diligence, Fraudulent Evasion of VAT
Tax Law European Union Law VAT Input Tax Recovery MTIC Fraud Due Diligence Fraudulent Evasion of VAT

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roma II Ltd

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

VAT Input Tax Appeal (mtic Fraud) / First Tier Tribunal (tax), Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's transaction was connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT
  2. 2 Whether the appellant knew or should have known of the connection to fraud
  3. 3 Whether input tax recovery should be denied

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's transaction was connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT, and the appellant, through its director Mr Nayar, should have known of this connection given the circumstances, lack of commerciality, inadequate due diligence, and prior warnings about MTIC fraud. Therefore, the appellant is denied the right to recover input tax on the transaction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Input tax recovery in the sum of £167,737.50 denied
  • Appellant to pay the costs of and occasioned by this appeal, to be assessed by the High Court if not agreed