In Exeter Estates Ltd v HMRC (TC02632 – 12 April) a company (E) had acquired a large site adjoining a dual carriageway in 2007. The site included a petrol station and several warehouses and offices. E advised HMRC that it had made an option to tax the site. In 2011 HMRC formed the opinion that E had failed to account for VAT on rental income from several buildings which it had opted to tax and issued an assessment. E appealed contending that in 2007 four weeks after its initial letter to HMRC it had sent a further letter stating ‘option to tax to be limited to area etched red on enclosed plan excluding buildings etched blue’.
The First-tier Tribunal accepted E’s evidence and allowed its appeal. Judge Gort found that ‘it was quite clearly not...
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 Exeter Estates Ltd v HMRC (TC02632 – 12 April) a company (E) had acquired a large site adjoining a dual carriageway in 2007. The site included a petrol station and several warehouses and offices. E advised HMRC that it had made an option to tax the site. In 2011 HMRC formed the opinion that E had failed to account for VAT on rental income from several buildings which it had opted to tax and issued an assessment. E appealed contending that in 2007 four weeks after its initial letter to HMRC it had sent a further letter stating ‘option to tax to be limited to area etched red on enclosed plan excluding buildings etched blue’.
The First-tier Tribunal accepted E’s evidence and allowed its appeal. Judge Gort found that ‘it was quite clearly not...
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:
