In The Rank Group v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 251 (2 May 2018) the FTT found that HMRC had been entitled to deduct input tax wrongly deducted by the appellant from repayments made under VATA 1994 s 80.
The Rank Group made supplies of mechanised and cash bingo to members of the public. Until 2009 in accordance with HMRC’s practice it treated its supplies of bingo as standard rated. However following the CJEU’s decisions in the joined cases of Linneweber (Case C-453/02) and Savvas Akriditis (Case C-462/02) it was established that the Rank Group’s supplies were actually exempt.
The Rank Group had made claims for repayment under VATA 1994 s 80. In calculating the amounts due under the relevant claims HMRC had taken into account both wrongly paid output tax and wrongly deducted input tax. However it was accepted...
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 The Rank Group v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 251 (2 May 2018) the FTT found that HMRC had been entitled to deduct input tax wrongly deducted by the appellant from repayments made under VATA 1994 s 80.
The Rank Group made supplies of mechanised and cash bingo to members of the public. Until 2009 in accordance with HMRC’s practice it treated its supplies of bingo as standard rated. However following the CJEU’s decisions in the joined cases of Linneweber (Case C-453/02) and Savvas Akriditis (Case C-462/02) it was established that the Rank Group’s supplies were actually exempt.
The Rank Group had made claims for repayment under VATA 1994 s 80. In calculating the amounts due under the relevant claims HMRC had taken into account both wrongly paid output tax and wrongly deducted input tax. However it was accepted...
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:
