In HMRC v The Ice Rink Company [2019] UKUT 108 (8 April 2019) the UT found that the FTT had made an error of law when finding that the Ice Rink made separate supplies (as opposed to a single standard-rated supply).
The Ice Rink sold package deals including access to its ice rink and the hire of skates. The issue was whether it was making single composite supplies or multiple supplies. If the company made multiple supplies the hire of skates was zero-rated but HMRC argued that The Ice Rink made single standard-rated supplies.
The FTT had found that (1) the individual constituents of a package could be and were purchased on their own so that (2) it would not be artificial to split the package into two. The FTT had therefore concluded that the supply of access to...
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 The Ice Rink Company [2019] UKUT 108 (8 April 2019) the UT found that the FTT had made an error of law when finding that the Ice Rink made separate supplies (as opposed to a single standard-rated supply).
The Ice Rink sold package deals including access to its ice rink and the hire of skates. The issue was whether it was making single composite supplies or multiple supplies. If the company made multiple supplies the hire of skates was zero-rated but HMRC argued that The Ice Rink made single standard-rated supplies.
The FTT had found that (1) the individual constituents of a package could be and were purchased on their own so that (2) it would not be artificial to split the package into two. The FTT had therefore concluded that the supply of access to...
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:
