In Cavendish Green v HMRC [2018] UKUT 66 (8 March 2018) the UT found that the sale of a building did not fall within VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 5 and was therefore standard-rated.
Cavendish Green had sold a development site in Surrey and the issue was whether the sale constituted a first grant by a person ‘constructing a building designed as a dwelling of a major interest in or any part of the building or its site’ for the purpose of VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 5 so that the supply was zero-rated.
There were two questions: first whether Cavendish Green could be said to have been ‘constructing a building designed as a dwelling’ when at the time of sale the only part of the development which had been constructed was a garden wall; and...
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 Cavendish Green v HMRC [2018] UKUT 66 (8 March 2018) the UT found that the sale of a building did not fall within VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 5 and was therefore standard-rated.
Cavendish Green had sold a development site in Surrey and the issue was whether the sale constituted a first grant by a person ‘constructing a building designed as a dwelling of a major interest in or any part of the building or its site’ for the purpose of VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 5 so that the supply was zero-rated.
There were two questions: first whether Cavendish Green could be said to have been ‘constructing a building designed as a dwelling’ when at the time of sale the only part of the development which had been constructed was a garden wall; and...
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:
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=c9a7a0cc_1)
