In Mrs R Holmes v HMRC (TC01207 – 10 June) HMRC issued a ruling that a woman (H) who provided nutritional therapy was required to register for VAT. She appealed contending that her supplies should be treated as exempt under VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 6 Item 2.
The First-tier Tribunal rejected this contention and dismissed her appeal holding that H’s activities ‘fall into the category of consultation/analysis and advisory as distinct from private tuition’.
Why it matters: VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 6 Item 2 provides that the supply of private tuition in a subject ordinarily taught in a school or university may qualify for exemption for VAT.
The Tribunal upheld HMRC’s view that the ‘nutritional therapy’ which the appellant provided to her clients was outside the definition of ‘tuition’ and...
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 Mrs R Holmes v HMRC (TC01207 – 10 June) HMRC issued a ruling that a woman (H) who provided nutritional therapy was required to register for VAT. She appealed contending that her supplies should be treated as exempt under VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 6 Item 2.
The First-tier Tribunal rejected this contention and dismissed her appeal holding that H’s activities ‘fall into the category of consultation/analysis and advisory as distinct from private tuition’.
Why it matters: VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 6 Item 2 provides that the supply of private tuition in a subject ordinarily taught in a school or university may qualify for exemption for VAT.
The Tribunal upheld HMRC’s view that the ‘nutritional therapy’ which the appellant provided to her clients was outside the definition of ‘tuition’ and...
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)")