Taygroup Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 336 (TC) (06 June 2013)

Taygroup Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 336 (TC) (06 June 2013)

Taygroup's self-billing agreements did not comply with Regulation 13(3B) as they did not specify a period tied to the underlying supply contract, and suppliers were not VAT registered at the relevant times. Therefore, the self-billing invoices were invalid and input tax deduction was not permissible. HMRC's refusal to accept alternative evidence under Regulation 29 was not unreasonable or disproportionate under domestic or European law.

Citation
[2013] UKFTT 336 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Taygroup Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 June 2013
Procedural Posture
VAT Input Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Input Tax Deduction, Self Billing Arrangements, VAT Registration, Evidence Requirements
Tax Law VAT Input Tax Deduction Self Billing Arrangements VAT Registration Evidence Requirements

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Taygroup Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Taygroup's self-billing agreements complied with Regulation 13 of the VAT Regulations 1995
  2. 2 Whether input tax deduction is permissible where suppliers were not VAT registered
  3. 3 Whether HMRC exercised its discretion under Regulation 29 unreasonably

Ratio Decidendi

Taygroup's self-billing agreements did not comply with Regulation 13(3B) as they did not specify a period tied to the underlying supply contract, and suppliers were not VAT registered at the relevant times. Therefore, the self-billing invoices were invalid and input tax deduction was not permissible. HMRC's refusal to accept alternative evidence under Regulation 29 was not unreasonable or disproportionate under domestic or European law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Input tax deduction claimed by Taygroup disallowed
  • No further relief granted