| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2001] All ER (D) 380 (Dec) |
| Court: | Chancery Division |
| Judge: | Neuberger J |
| Representation | Jonathan Peacock QC (instructed by the Solicitor for the Customs & Excise) for the commissioners. |
| Paul Lasok QC and Michael Patchett-Joyce (instructed by Addleshaw Booth & Co ) for the appellants. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 21 December 2001 |
Catchwords
Value added tax - Input tax - Tax on supply to a taxable person of goods or services for purpose of business carried on by him - First appellant bank whose input tax recovery was restricted - First appellant entering building transactions with second and third appellants in order to increase VAT recovery - Commissioners refusing subsequent claims for VAT - VAT tribunal upholding commissioners' decision - Whether tribunal erring in deciding that transactions constituted tax avoidance.
The Case
Where it was established that the VAT tribunal had adopted the wrong approach in making its decision, that tribunal had erred in law, and in the absence of authority, the case would be remitted to the original tribunal. In the instant case, the tribunal had asked and answered the wrong question, and had therefore erred in law. Accordingly, the case would be remitted to the original tribunal.
Lexis®Library
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
