The company had taken over other companies, bringing them into its VAT Group. It made BDR claims on behalf of those companies, on the basis that they had failed to do so, due to Retention of Title clauses. The FTT and the Upper Tier were unimpressed at the lack of contemporaneous evidence of BDR claims. It was appreciated that it is not easy to demonstrate that a BDR has not been made; it is not easy to prove a negative. Even so, the FTT concluded (para 91): “The Appellant has not shown that it was more likely than not that no VAT BDR claims were made in the Claim Period.”
Source Accountingweb
Latest Posts in "United Kingdom"
- Property TOGCs Under the Microscope: Navigating VAT Conditions and HMRC Expectations
- Fintua Sponsors Indirect Taxes Annual Conference 2025 in London (Nov 12)
- VAT Hike Would Cause Biggest Economic Damage, Leading Economists Warn Chancellor
- HMRC Clarifies VAT Treatment of Overage Payments on Land Sales
- VAT Error Correction: Amending Returns, Claiming Refunds, and Avoiding Penalties
