In Iveco v HMRC [2016] UKUT 263 (13 June 2016) the UT found that Iveco’s claim for a repayment was out of time.
Iveco was a distributor of commercial vehicles. At some stage after the sales had been concluded it had made promotional payments to its customers. Under the Principal VAT Directive art 11C(1) where the price of a supply is reduced after the supply has taken place the value of the supply must be reduced accordingly. Article 11C(1) had not been implemented in UK domestic law until 1 January 1990 when the predecessor of the VAT Regulations 1995 reg 38 had come into force. However art 11C(1) had had direct effect; Iveco could rely on it to reduce the value of its supplies notwithstanding the absence of implementing legislation before 1 January 1990.
Iveco’s position was that unless and until...
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 Iveco v HMRC [2016] UKUT 263 (13 June 2016) the UT found that Iveco’s claim for a repayment was out of time.
Iveco was a distributor of commercial vehicles. At some stage after the sales had been concluded it had made promotional payments to its customers. Under the Principal VAT Directive art 11C(1) where the price of a supply is reduced after the supply has taken place the value of the supply must be reduced accordingly. Article 11C(1) had not been implemented in UK domestic law until 1 January 1990 when the predecessor of the VAT Regulations 1995 reg 38 had come into force. However art 11C(1) had had direct effect; Iveco could rely on it to reduce the value of its supplies notwithstanding the absence of implementing legislation before 1 January 1990.
Iveco’s position was that unless and until...
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:
