InA Desmond Manifold v HMRC[2016] UKFTT 676 (10 October 2016) the FTT found that the home delivery of hot meals fell within VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 1 note 3(b) and was therefore standard-rated.
The taxpayer who traded as meals on wheels appealed against HMRC’s assessments raised on the basis that he had been making standard-rated hot food sales. He accepted that he supplied hot food; however he submitted that the supplies fell outside the definition of ‘in the course of catering’ as they were not for consumption on the premises on which they were made.
The FTT noted however that the fact that the food was not consumed on the premises where it was prepared had no bearing. Note (3)(b) provided: ‘a supply of anything in the course of catering includes ... any...
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:
InA Desmond Manifold v HMRC[2016] UKFTT 676 (10 October 2016) the FTT found that the home delivery of hot meals fell within VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 1 note 3(b) and was therefore standard-rated.
The taxpayer who traded as meals on wheels appealed against HMRC’s assessments raised on the basis that he had been making standard-rated hot food sales. He accepted that he supplied hot food; however he submitted that the supplies fell outside the definition of ‘in the course of catering’ as they were not for consumption on the premises on which they were made.
The FTT noted however that the fact that the food was not consumed on the premises where it was prepared had no bearing. Note (3)(b) provided: ‘a supply of anything in the course of catering includes ... any...
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:
