In Rowhildon v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 491 (21 August 2018) the FTT found that HMRC had been unreasonable in refusing the late notification of an option to tax.
At a board meeting of the company it had been decided to purchase a property in Norwich and to deal with the ‘necessary paperwork’. Its directors accepted that the board minutes did not expressly refer to their intention to opt to tax; however they explained that as they would usually opt to tax non-residential buildings ‘it was not something which would be specifically set out’. They also contended that form VAT 1614A was duly sent out on 1 July 2016 a copy of which was kept on file. The form was sent by standard untracked post and it became apparent during a VAT enquiry in October 2016 that HMRC...
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 Rowhildon v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 491 (21 August 2018) the FTT found that HMRC had been unreasonable in refusing the late notification of an option to tax.
At a board meeting of the company it had been decided to purchase a property in Norwich and to deal with the ‘necessary paperwork’. Its directors accepted that the board minutes did not expressly refer to their intention to opt to tax; however they explained that as they would usually opt to tax non-residential buildings ‘it was not something which would be specifically set out’. They also contended that form VAT 1614A was duly sent out on 1 July 2016 a copy of which was kept on file. The form was sent by standard untracked post and it became apparent during a VAT enquiry in October 2016 that HMRC...
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:
