The respondent sought to deduct input tax from income it received from lettings. It had previously occupied the buildings itself making exempt supplies, but then let them. They later waved their exemption, and sought to deduct input tax for periods prior to the election. One issue was whether a lease was one supply or a series of supplies for each rent period.
Held: There was no valid distinction in the Regulation 85 deeming between rents to be set off against the period in which they fell due, and inputs for the same property. There was no connection between the pre-election expenses and the post election rent receipts. The taxpayers were however saved by regulation 109.
Judges:
Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Sedley
Statutes:
Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch 4 Para 4 s5(1) & (2), VAT Regulations 1995/2518 109
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Abbey National Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 22-Feb-2001
Where a part or whole of a business was sold as a going concern, not all the VAT on the expenses of the sale was to be set off against VAT. The entire amount of VAT could only be set off where the assets sold were sold as a properly identifiable . .
Appealed to – Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group plc v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 22-May-2003
The landlord had elected to waive exemption to charging VAT on its lettings. The tenant relet the demised premises, but at first without charging VAT. It later charged VAT on the sublease, but the commissioners objected to the attempt of the . .
Appeal from – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group Plc ChD 2000
The taxpayer sought to recover tax it had paid on VAT on rents. It had sublet and at first not charged VAT, but later changed its mind and charged VAT. The Commissioners objected to the reclaim for the earlier period.
Held: The tribunal’s . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group plc v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 22-May-2003
The landlord had elected to waive exemption to charging VAT on its lettings. The tenant relet the demised premises, but at first without charging VAT. It later charged VAT on the sublease, but the commissioners objected to the attempt of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
VAT, Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.166545
