In Gosling Leisure Ltd v HMRC (TC01866 – 15 March) a charity (GS) provided recreational and sporting facilities at a 54-acre site. A subsidiary company (GL) supplied bar and catering services. In 2007 the companies’ directors decided that GL should finance the construction of a spa which would include a gym which would be operated by GS. GL reclaimed input tax on the work. HMRC rejected the claim on the basis that the relevant supplies had actually been made to GS rather than to GL. GL appealed. The First-tier Tribunal allowed the appeal in principle holding that GL was occupying the land under a licence from GS and that there was a direct and immediate link between the supplies made to GL and the supplies made by GL so that it was entitled to reclaim the...
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 Gosling Leisure Ltd v HMRC (TC01866 – 15 March) a charity (GS) provided recreational and sporting facilities at a 54-acre site. A subsidiary company (GL) supplied bar and catering services. In 2007 the companies’ directors decided that GL should finance the construction of a spa which would include a gym which would be operated by GS. GL reclaimed input tax on the work. HMRC rejected the claim on the basis that the relevant supplies had actually been made to GS rather than to GL. GL appealed. The First-tier Tribunal allowed the appeal in principle holding that GL was occupying the land under a licence from GS and that there was a direct and immediate link between the supplies made to GL and the supplies made by GL so that it was entitled to reclaim the...
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)")