In T Heckingbottom v HMRC [2016] UKFTT 733 (31 October 2016) the FTT held that a bungalow subject to an occupation condition did not qualify as a dwelling for the purpose of the DIY builders refund scheme (VATA 1994 s 35 and Sch 8 group 5).
Mr Heckingbottom appealed against HMRC’s refusal of his claim for a VAT refund under the DIY scheme in relation to a bungalow. HMRC considered that the erection of the bungalow was not a ‘building designed as a dwelling’ because of a restriction on its use contained in the planning permission. The planning permission limited the occupation of the bungalow to persons employed in the fishing business on the site.
The appeal had been stayed behind R. Burton [2016] UKUT 20 in which the UT had held that an occupation restriction was sufficiently mandatory and clear to...
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 T Heckingbottom v HMRC [2016] UKFTT 733 (31 October 2016) the FTT held that a bungalow subject to an occupation condition did not qualify as a dwelling for the purpose of the DIY builders refund scheme (VATA 1994 s 35 and Sch 8 group 5).
Mr Heckingbottom appealed against HMRC’s refusal of his claim for a VAT refund under the DIY scheme in relation to a bungalow. HMRC considered that the erection of the bungalow was not a ‘building designed as a dwelling’ because of a restriction on its use contained in the planning permission. The planning permission limited the occupation of the bungalow to persons employed in the fishing business on the site.
The appeal had been stayed behind R. Burton [2016] UKUT 20 in which the UT had held that an occupation restriction was sufficiently mandatory and clear to...
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:
