header-logo header-logo

Value added tax

21 May 2010
Issue: 7418 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Mobilx Ltd (in Administration) and others v Revenue and Customs Commissioners and others [2010] EWCA Civ 517, [2010] All ER (D) 104 (May)

Tribunals should not unduly focus on the question whether a taxpayer had acted with due diligence. Even if a taxpayer had asked appropriate questions, he was not entitled to ignore the circumstances in which his transactions took place if the only reasonable explanation for them was that his transactions had been or would be connected to fraud.

The danger in focusing on the question of due diligence was that it might deflect a tribunal from asking the essential question whether or not the trader should have known that by his purchase he was taking part in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT. The circumstances might well establish that he was.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll