This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our privacy notice.

Was the error ‘careless’ or ‘deliberate’?

By Andrew Needham, May 2023

This was an appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The appellant sold used commercial vehicles to customers registered for VAT in Eire during VAT periods 08/12 to 10/15 and zero-rated their sales. HMRC was not satisfied that the appellant had provided sufficient evidence that goods supplied to its customers in Eire had been removed from the UK, and therefore there was no right to zero-rate those supplies; HMRC, HMRC also assessed for penalty purposes as a for deliberate inaccuracy. The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found for HMRC. This appeal was only on the grounds that the penalty should not have been for deliberate conduct. 

The appellant submitted that a deliberate inaccuracy required a finding that the taxpayer knew that a document contained an error and provided it to HMRC with the intention that HMRC should rely on the documents as accurate.  

In short, the FTT made two findings: first, that "CPR cannot have reasonably concluded that they

Subscribe to the McLaughlin’s Tax Case Library to get instant access
to the Tax Case Library.
14 day free trial , 90 day money back guarantee
Subscribe

Related or similar articles

Were cooked marshmallows normally eaten with the fingers or from a stick or skewer?
By Andrew Needham, May 2026
Were the supplies made by the appellant exempt supplies of domiciliary care or standard-rated supplies of staff subject to the reverse charge?
By Andrew Needham, April 2026
Were powdered drink concentrates food or standard-rated sports drinks?
By Andrew Needham, March 2025
Was input tax overclaimed on costs relating to the supply of management charges and had the charges been made at open market value?
By Andrew Needham, June 2021
Was the Respondent making exempt supplies of education?
By Andrew Needham, March 2021