In B&M Retail v HMRC [2014] UKFTT 902 (16 September 2014) the FTT held that there can only be one excise duty point.
B&M Retail is a leading retailer of alcoholic beverages. It procures stocks of alcohol for retail sale from suppliers; under B&M’s terms of business the suppliers are required to warrant the sale of the alcohol as ‘excise duty paid’.
During a visit of B&M’s warehouse HMRC detained goods (later seizing them) under the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 s 139 on the ground that excise duty had not been paid on these goods.
The issue was whether there could be more than one release for consumption (under The Excise Goods (Holding Movement and Duty Point) Regulations 2010 reg 6). HMRC contended that the provisions reflected a continuous state of affairs whereas B&M argued...
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 B&M Retail v HMRC [2014] UKFTT 902 (16 September 2014) the FTT held that there can only be one excise duty point.
B&M Retail is a leading retailer of alcoholic beverages. It procures stocks of alcohol for retail sale from suppliers; under B&M’s terms of business the suppliers are required to warrant the sale of the alcohol as ‘excise duty paid’.
During a visit of B&M’s warehouse HMRC detained goods (later seizing them) under the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 s 139 on the ground that excise duty had not been paid on these goods.
The issue was whether there could be more than one release for consumption (under The Excise Goods (Holding Movement and Duty Point) Regulations 2010 reg 6). HMRC contended that the provisions reflected a continuous state of affairs whereas B&M argued...
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:
