In Concept Multi Cars v HMRC (TC03250 – 21 January 2014) a trader supplied disabled customers with vans adapted to their requirements. The issue was whether the supplies should be zero rated on the basis that the vans had been ‘substantially and permanently adapted to enable a handicapped person … who usually uses a wheelchair … to enter and drive or otherwise be carried in the motor vehicle’ (VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 12 item 2A note 5L).
The tribunal rejected HMRC’s contention that the term ‘substantially’ in the legislation required that were it not for the adaptation a disabled person could not use the vehicle.
The tribunal then reviewed each of the challenged ‘adaptations’. It accepted that ambulance ramp fixings enabled safe access to the vehicle.
In relation to the swivel seats the fact that they...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In Concept Multi Cars v HMRC (TC03250 – 21 January 2014) a trader supplied disabled customers with vans adapted to their requirements. The issue was whether the supplies should be zero rated on the basis that the vans had been ‘substantially and permanently adapted to enable a handicapped person … who usually uses a wheelchair … to enter and drive or otherwise be carried in the motor vehicle’ (VATA 1994 Sch 8 Group 12 item 2A note 5L).
The tribunal rejected HMRC’s contention that the term ‘substantially’ in the legislation required that were it not for the adaptation a disabled person could not use the vehicle.
The tribunal then reviewed each of the challenged ‘adaptations’. It accepted that ambulance ramp fixings enabled safe access to the vehicle.
In relation to the swivel seats the fact that they...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
.jpg?sfvrsn=335a554c_0 "300 x 250 (MPU)")