Star Services Oxford Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 22 August 2022

Neutral citation: [2022] UKFTT 291 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

Star Services Oxford Ltd appealed a VAT assessment of £26,250 after HMRC disallowed input tax it had claimed on rental invoices for 6 Gloucester Street addressed to Mr Abdul Latifi. The Tribunal found the legal contracting party under the lease was Mr Latifi (a sole proprietor), not the company, and therefore Star Services was not entitled to reclaim the VAT. HMRC’s best-judgment assessment was upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

The Tribunal treated the decisive rule as that input tax may only be reclaimed by the actual recipient of the supply and that a valid VAT invoice addressed to the claimant legal entity is required to evidence entitlement; where invoices were addressed to Mr Latifi and the contractual lease was with him, the company could not lawfully deduct that input VAT. The Tribunal also applied that HMRC may make a best-judgment assessment based on the material before them and that the taxpayer bears the burden of showing the assessment is incorrect.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The Tribunal observed (but did not treat as determinative) that entries in a company’s books or later reassignment of a lease, later VAT registrations, or a belated option to tax do not override the underlying contractual/legal position or retrospectively validate input claims where invoices were addressed to a different legal person during the relevant periods.