In Koon Chung and Yuk Fong Lam and others v HMRC [2016] UKFTT 215 (29 March 2016) the FTT struck out four appeals against HMRC’s decision not to repay output tax on supplies of hot takeaway food.
It was accepted by all four appellants that their original grounds of appeal stated in their notices of appeal had raised the same legal issues as had been decided by the Court of Appeal in Sub One [2014] EWCA Civ 773 in favour of HMRC. However they raised new grounds of appeal which had not been decided in the Sub One litigation.
The FTT accepted that the appellants’ delay in identifying the new grounds may have prejudiced HMRC as the appeals may take longer to resolve. However this did not justify keeping out an arguable point of law. The issue...
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 Koon Chung and Yuk Fong Lam and others v HMRC [2016] UKFTT 215 (29 March 2016) the FTT struck out four appeals against HMRC’s decision not to repay output tax on supplies of hot takeaway food.
It was accepted by all four appellants that their original grounds of appeal stated in their notices of appeal had raised the same legal issues as had been decided by the Court of Appeal in Sub One [2014] EWCA Civ 773 in favour of HMRC. However they raised new grounds of appeal which had not been decided in the Sub One litigation.
The FTT accepted that the appellants’ delay in identifying the new grounds may have prejudiced HMRC as the appeals may take longer to resolve. However this did not justify keeping out an arguable point of law. The issue...
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:
