Flood v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX - Appellant registered for VAT between August 2014 and June 2015 but continued trading) [2021] UKFTT 37 (TC) (8 February 2021)

Flood v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX - Appellant registered for VAT between August 2014 and June 2015 but continued trading) [2021] UKFTT 37 (TC) (8 February 2021)

The appellant's written claim was made on 27 November 2019, which was out of time for 44 payments made before December 2015. For the two December 2015 payments, the appellant failed to provide evidence that they were attributable to supplies made while VAT registered. The appeal fails on both grounds.

Citation
[2021] UKFTT 37 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Ryan Flood; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 February 2021
Procedural Posture
VAT Error Correction Claim Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Paper Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Value Added Tax, Error Correction Claims, Input Tax Recovery, VAT Registration and De Registration, Statutory Time Limits

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryan Flood

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

VAT Error Correction Claim Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Paper Determination

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's error correction claim for input tax on 46 payments was made within the statutory time limits
  2. 2 Whether the appellant provided sufficient evidence to support the claim for input tax on two payments made in December 2015 after de-registration

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's written claim was made on 27 November 2019, which was out of time for 44 payments made before December 2015. For the two December 2015 payments, the appellant failed to provide evidence that they were attributable to supplies made while VAT registered. The appeal fails on both grounds.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No repayment of input tax on 46 payments
  • No award of interest or compensation