Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 292 (Mar)
Court: Chancery Division
Judge:

Pumfrey J

Representation Nicholas Paines QC and Peter Mantle (instructed by the Solicitor for the Customs and Excise) for the commissioners.
  Roderick Cordara QC and Gerard Hillman (instructed by Hutchinson Mainprice) for the taxpayers.
Judgment Dates: 20 March 2002

Catchwords

Value added tax - Exemptions - Residential care homes - Taxpayers operating two residential care homes for profit - Commissioners deciding taxpayers providing services exempt from VAT - Tribunal deciding services provided by taxpayers not exempt - Whether residential care home services provided by taxpayers exempt - , Items 4, 9 - Council Directive (EEC) 77/388, art 13A1(b).

The Case

Whether services provided by residential care homes which were operated for profit were exempt from VAT or not depended on whether they fell within Items 4 and 9 of Group 7 of Sch 9 to the . In the instant case, such services were not exempt from VAT as the care they provided was not medically or surgically related to qualify it for exemption under Item 4, and since the services were supplied for profit, they did not fall within Item 9. Accordingly, the VAT tribunal had not erred in its decision that those services were not exempt, and the commissioners' appeal would be dismissed.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.