Megantic Services Ltd v HMRC (No 2)

Alan Dolton

In Megantic Services Ltd v HMRC (No 2) (Upper Tribunal – 11 January) a company (M) claimed a substantial repayment of VAT. HMRC rejected the claim on the basis that it appeared that the relevant transactions formed part of a MTIC fraud. M appealed. HMRC made an application to admit evidence relating to certain transactions with a Curacao bank (F). M opposed the application but the tribunal granted it. Judge Berner observed that F’s business had been ‘effectively closed down’ following an investigation by the UK and Netherlands authorities and a raid on its premises. The delay in reviewing and processing the evidence obtained as a result of this investigation had not been unreasonable. The transactions at issue in this case were complex and the time taken in analysing the evidence was not disproportionate. The Upper Tribunal upheld this decision. Applying the principles laid down by Lawrence...

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.

If you are already a subscriber, sign in

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.