In HMRC v NT ADA [2018] UKUT 59 (22 February 2018) the UT found that a penalty notice issued under VATA 1994 could be valid even though it failed to mention the taxpayer’s entitlement to request a review.
The underlying substantive dispute between the parties related to whether a Jersey incorporated company NT ADA was within the scope of UK VAT in respect of supplies made to UK-based customers. The FTT had struck out the penalty appeal on the ground that HMRC had failed to comply with the requirements of VATA 1994 s 83A relating to the offer of a review and that this failure invalidated the decision to impose the penalty. Following the FTT’s decision HMRC had cancelled the original penalty but still appealed to the FTT on the basis that the issue raised was of general importance.
It was...
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 HMRC v NT ADA [2018] UKUT 59 (22 February 2018) the UT found that a penalty notice issued under VATA 1994 could be valid even though it failed to mention the taxpayer’s entitlement to request a review.
The underlying substantive dispute between the parties related to whether a Jersey incorporated company NT ADA was within the scope of UK VAT in respect of supplies made to UK-based customers. The FTT had struck out the penalty appeal on the ground that HMRC had failed to comply with the requirements of VATA 1994 s 83A relating to the offer of a review and that this failure invalidated the decision to impose the penalty. Following the FTT’s decision HMRC had cancelled the original penalty but still appealed to the FTT on the basis that the issue raised was of general importance.
It was...
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:
