Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Two wins for HMRC in DCM Optical Holdings narrow the scope of VAT challenges

The Supreme Court’s decision provides useful clarification on two issues arising in VAT disputes. Jake Landman and Abigail McGregor (Pinsent Masons) discuss the practical consequences for taxpayers.

The Supreme Court’s decision in DCM (Optical Holdings) Ltd v HMRC [2022] UKSC 26 provides useful clarification on two issues arising in VAT disputes: the one-year time bar rule for assessments and HMRC’s power to refuse to pay a VAT credit.

What was the case about?

The decision concerned an appeal made by DCM (Optical Holdings) Ltd which was the holding company and VAT representative member of a group that ran optician and other health businesses mainly trading as Optical Express.

While the group’s work supplying glasses is VATable the provision of eye tests and other optician services is not making it a partially exempt VAT group. Partially exempt businesses can under VATA 1994 s 19(4) recover some...

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:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top