InWhy Pay More For Cars v HMRC[2015] UKUT 468 (8 September 2015) the UT confirmed the FTT’s finding that the appellant had not established as a matter of fact that it had overpaid VAT.
The appeal related to a claim for repayment of VAT (VATA 1994 s 80) by Why Pay More For Cars (WPMC). WPMC had accounted for output tax on bonus payments received from certain car manufacturers incorrectly assuming that the bonus payments were consideration for taxable supplies of services by WPMC to the car manufacturers. Following the ECJ decision in Elida Gibbs C-317/94 HMRC accepted that VAT was not due on the receipt of the bonus payments which should have been treated as discounts on the original prices of the cars. HMRC however refused the claim for repayment on the ground...
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:
InWhy Pay More For Cars v HMRC[2015] UKUT 468 (8 September 2015) the UT confirmed the FTT’s finding that the appellant had not established as a matter of fact that it had overpaid VAT.
The appeal related to a claim for repayment of VAT (VATA 1994 s 80) by Why Pay More For Cars (WPMC). WPMC had accounted for output tax on bonus payments received from certain car manufacturers incorrectly assuming that the bonus payments were consideration for taxable supplies of services by WPMC to the car manufacturers. Following the ECJ decision in Elida Gibbs C-317/94 HMRC accepted that VAT was not due on the receipt of the bonus payments which should have been treated as discounts on the original prices of the cars. HMRC however refused the claim for repayment on the ground...
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:
