In Buckingham Bingo v HMRC [2019] UKUT 140 (2 May 2019) the UT found that the taxpayer could not resurrect a 2012 claim in order to avail itself of a favourable ruling by the FTT in a similar case.
Buckingham Bingo (BB) ran a bingo business. The dispute between BB and HMRC had arisen when HMRC had changed its policy and required taxpayers to account for VAT on a session basis instead of a game by game basis. According to BB this had reduced the proportion of the amounts paid by participants which constituted participation fees subject to VAT. BB had therefore sought to recover output tax that it considered it had wrongly overpaid. Following extensive correspondence HMRC had issued a decision letter in July 2012 rejecting the claim for repayment. In September 2012 PwC (representing BB) had confirmed in writing to HMRC that...
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 Buckingham Bingo v HMRC [2019] UKUT 140 (2 May 2019) the UT found that the taxpayer could not resurrect a 2012 claim in order to avail itself of a favourable ruling by the FTT in a similar case.
Buckingham Bingo (BB) ran a bingo business. The dispute between BB and HMRC had arisen when HMRC had changed its policy and required taxpayers to account for VAT on a session basis instead of a game by game basis. According to BB this had reduced the proportion of the amounts paid by participants which constituted participation fees subject to VAT. BB had therefore sought to recover output tax that it considered it had wrongly overpaid. Following extensive correspondence HMRC had issued a decision letter in July 2012 rejecting the claim for repayment. In September 2012 PwC (representing BB) had confirmed in writing to HMRC that...
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:
