This case concerns the extent to which the taxpayers can recover input tax incurred on certain advertising services received from Google. The taxpayers are both well-known sofa retailers. The FTT notes that they do sell other furniture but both taxpayers predominantly sell sofas. The difference between the taxpayers is that Sofology Ltd (Sofology) only started selling online at the very end of the assessment period. DFS Furniture Company Ltd (DFS) sold sofas in-store, by telephone and online throughout the period.
Source KPMG
Latest Posts in "United Kingdom"
- Upper Tribunal Rules Cosmetic Treatments by Medical Professionals Can Qualify for VAT Exemption
- High Court Rules Interest Payable on VAT in Contract Dispute Settlement
- FTT Grants Late VAT Appeal Despite Rejected Review Request Arguments
- Property TOGCs Under the Microscope: Navigating VAT Conditions and HMRC Expectations
- Fintua Sponsors Indirect Taxes Annual Conference 2025 in London (Nov 12)
