VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – dishonest evasion – VATA s 60 – appellant paying six successive centrally-issued assessments for less than the true liability – inadequate attempts to put accounting records in order – whether ‘dishonest’ – yes – appeal dismissed but reduction for mitigation increased
Judges:
Colin Bishopp C
Citations:
[2004] UKVAT V18563
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
Cited – Gandhi Tandoori Restaurant v Customs and Excise Commissioners VDT 1989
The court considered the use of R v Ghosh when considering whether dishonesty had been established under section 13 of the 1983 Act, saying: ‘It is to be observed that in section 13(1) the first requirement for liability to a penalty is that the . .
Cited – Regina v Dealy CACD 13-Dec-1994
Evasion of VAT does not require proof of intent to permanently deprive, ‘evasion’ can consist in a deferment, rather than permanent evasion, of a liability. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
VAT
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199117
