Hartley Foster considers the test for MTIC fraud following Mobilx Ltd v HMRC
On 12 May 2010 the Court of Appeal released its decisions in Mobilx Ltd (in administration) v HMRC; HMRC v Blue Sphere Global Ltd and Calltell Telecom Ltd v HMRC [2010] EWCA Civ 517. The proceedings concerned decisions of HMRC to refuse input tax claims on the basis that the companies concerned 'knew or should have known' that the relevant transactions were or were likely to have been connected with fraud. This type of case has been categorised as 'MTIC means of knowledge' following the language used by the ECJ in Axel Kittel v Belgium; Belgium v Recolta Recycling (Joined Cases C-439/04 and C-440/04) [2006] ECR 1-6161. It is not proposed to rehearse here how MTIC fraud operates within the EU. 'MTIC case law round-up' Tax Journal Issue 931 28 April...
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:
Hartley Foster considers the test for MTIC fraud following Mobilx Ltd v HMRC
On 12 May 2010 the Court of Appeal released its decisions in Mobilx Ltd (in administration) v HMRC; HMRC v Blue Sphere Global Ltd and Calltell Telecom Ltd v HMRC [2010] EWCA Civ 517. The proceedings concerned decisions of HMRC to refuse input tax claims on the basis that the companies concerned 'knew or should have known' that the relevant transactions were or were likely to have been connected with fraud. This type of case has been categorised as 'MTIC means of knowledge' following the language used by the ECJ in Axel Kittel v Belgium; Belgium v Recolta Recycling (Joined Cases C-439/04 and C-440/04) [2006] ECR 1-6161. It is not proposed to rehearse here how MTIC fraud operates within the EU. 'MTIC case law round-up' Tax Journal Issue 931 28 April...
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:
