In Birmingham Hippodrome Theatre Trust Ltd v HMRC (Upper Tribunal – 18 February) a company (B) which was a registered charity and operated a theatre had accounted for VAT on supplies which qualified for exemption as ‘cultural services’. In 2007 it submitted a claim for repayment covering the period from 1990 to 1996. HMRC rejected the claim on the grounds that for 2000 and 2001 B had reclaimed substantial input tax on the refurbishment of its theatre which should have been attributed to exempt supplies and that the effect of VATA 1994 s 81(3A) was that the previous underclaim of input tax should be set against the subsequent overclaim. The First-tier Tribunal accepted this contention and dismissed the appeal and the Upper Tribunal upheld this decision. Proudman J held that ‘the operation of s 81(3A) is...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In Birmingham Hippodrome Theatre Trust Ltd v HMRC (Upper Tribunal – 18 February) a company (B) which was a registered charity and operated a theatre had accounted for VAT on supplies which qualified for exemption as ‘cultural services’. In 2007 it submitted a claim for repayment covering the period from 1990 to 1996. HMRC rejected the claim on the grounds that for 2000 and 2001 B had reclaimed substantial input tax on the refurbishment of its theatre which should have been attributed to exempt supplies and that the effect of VATA 1994 s 81(3A) was that the previous underclaim of input tax should be set against the subsequent overclaim. The First-tier Tribunal accepted this contention and dismissed the appeal and the Upper Tribunal upheld this decision. Proudman J held that ‘the operation of s 81(3A) is...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
