- HMRC applied to strike out Mr Poulton’s appeal against their decision that he was not entitled to claim back VAT incorrectly charged by a supplier.
- HMRC argued that since Brexit, there was no longer any basis for making Reemtsma claims.
- The FTT dismissed HMRC’s application, finding that Mr Poulton had a realistic prospect of succeeding in an argument that the effect of s28, Finance Act 2024, is to preserve Reemtsma claims.
- The FTT also found that Mr Poulton had a realistic prospect of succeeding in an argument that a conforming construction is available to allow a Reemtsma claim under s35, VATA 1994.
- The FTT recommended that Mr Poulton commence parallel proceedings in the County Court to cover the possibility that the Tribunal should decide that it does not have jurisdiction in respect of Reemtsma claims.
- The FTT recommended that Mr Poulton seek the assistance of a pro bono barrister.
Source: claritaxnews.com
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
