||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 303 (May)
|| EWHC 1137 (Ch)
||Rupert Anderson QC and Alan Bates (instructed by the Acting Solicitor for Revenue and Customs) for the commissioners.
||Jonathan Peacock QC (instructed by Forbes Hall) for the taxpayer.
||22 May 2008
Value added tax - Exemptions - Financial services - Company providing range of administrative and support services to dentists in return for monthly fees - Whether monthly fees falling within exemption for provision of financial services - Whether services provided by company constituting a composite or multiple supply - Whether VAT tribunal correct in deciding apportionment of monthly fees necessary - Council Directive (EEC) 77/338, art 13B(d), para 3.
On the commissioners' appeal against a decision of a VAT tribunal that if a payment handling service provided by a company to dentists stood on its own it would be exempt, and that the company's services were not a single composite supply but a number of separate supplies of which payment handling was the principal one, the commissioners' appeal was dismissed, as was the taxpayer's cross-appeal against the tribunal's decision that it was necessary to apportion the company's monthly fees on the basis that the other supplies could not all properly be regarded as ancillary to the principal supply.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- 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
- 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