In Lower Mill Estate Ltd v HMRC (and related appeal) (Upper Tribunal – 14 January) a company (L) owned a site which had planning permission for the construction of up to 575 residential homes subject to the condition that these homes should not be occupied as a principal place of residence. An associated company (C) provided construction services. L sold plots of land on the site under agreements whereby C agreed to build a holiday home on the plot. C did not account for tax on its supplies treating them as zero-rated. HMRC issued assessments on both L and C on the basis that in reality each transaction was a single supply of the grant of a major interest in leasehold holiday accommodation which was chargeable to VAT at the standard rate. L and C appealed. The First-Tier Tribunal dismissed the appeals...
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 Lower Mill Estate Ltd v HMRC (and related appeal) (Upper Tribunal – 14 January) a company (L) owned a site which had planning permission for the construction of up to 575 residential homes subject to the condition that these homes should not be occupied as a principal place of residence. An associated company (C) provided construction services. L sold plots of land on the site under agreements whereby C agreed to build a holiday home on the plot. C did not account for tax on its supplies treating them as zero-rated. HMRC issued assessments on both L and C on the basis that in reality each transaction was a single supply of the grant of a major interest in leasehold holiday accommodation which was chargeable to VAT at the standard rate. L and C appealed. The First-Tier Tribunal dismissed the appeals...
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:
