Chris Reece brings us more VAT Tribunal summaries. This week he covers 20879 – 20889. These are up-to-date to 15 December 2008
Loser claims costs
MG Rover made a claim for repayment of input tax incurred which in fact it had never paid. HMRC refused the repayment arguing that it would unjustly enrich MG Rover. Later perhaps on the basis that the unjust enrichment defence did not apply in respect of MG Rover's claim (as argued by MG Rover in its appeal against HMRC's refusal) HMRC put in a statement of case arguing that the input tax in question was not input tax. MG Rover had not paid the tax in question (deferred import VAT) because it had...
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:
Chris Reece brings us more VAT Tribunal summaries. This week he covers 20879 – 20889. These are up-to-date to 15 December 2008
Loser claims costs
MG Rover made a claim for repayment of input tax incurred which in fact it had never paid. HMRC refused the repayment arguing that it would unjustly enrich MG Rover. Later perhaps on the basis that the unjust enrichment defence did not apply in respect of MG Rover's claim (as argued by MG Rover in its appeal against HMRC's refusal) HMRC put in a statement of case arguing that the input tax in question was not input tax. MG Rover had not paid the tax in question (deferred import VAT) because it had...
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:
90a1d87b-c1b5-43c3-a720-cd324830adee.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=1b2d0a7e_1)
