In Croall Bryson & Co Ltd v HMRC (TC01341 – 18 August) a company (C) supplied seven motor vehicles (all of which were adapted Land Rovers or Range Rovers) to handicapped people and treated the supplies as zero-rated.
HMRC issued an assessment charging tax on the basis that the supplies did not meet the conditions of VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 12 Item 2A.
The Tribunal reviewed the evidence in detail and allowed C’s appeal against this decision finding that C ‘had obtained sufficient evidence of eligibility’.
Why it matters: VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 12 Item 2A provides that the supply of a ‘qualifying motor vehicle’ to a handicapped person who usually uses a wheelchair qualifies for zero-rating.
The Tribunal held that the company had produced...
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 Croall Bryson & Co Ltd v HMRC (TC01341 – 18 August) a company (C) supplied seven motor vehicles (all of which were adapted Land Rovers or Range Rovers) to handicapped people and treated the supplies as zero-rated.
HMRC issued an assessment charging tax on the basis that the supplies did not meet the conditions of VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 12 Item 2A.
The Tribunal reviewed the evidence in detail and allowed C’s appeal against this decision finding that C ‘had obtained sufficient evidence of eligibility’.
Why it matters: VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 12 Item 2A provides that the supply of a ‘qualifying motor vehicle’ to a handicapped person who usually uses a wheelchair qualifies for zero-rating.
The Tribunal held that the company had produced...
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:
