Samuel Halpern v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2023] UKFTT 959 (TC)
Gregory Sewell v The Commissioners For HMRC
22 August 2024
[2024] UKFTT 773 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal
Mr. Sewell built a caravan and was wrongly told by HMRC he'd get a VAT refund. HMRC changed its mind, so he appealed. The court said it couldn't overturn HMRC's decision because it doesn't have the right kind of power to do that; only a higher court can. Even though HMRC was wrong, Mr. Sewell lost.
Key Facts
- •Mr. Sewell constructed a static caravan and incurred VAT.
- •HMRC advised him during a phone call that the construction was zero-rated for VAT.
- •Mr. Sewell claimed a VAT refund based on this advice.
- •HMRC rejected the claim, stating that caravans are not covered by the DIY refund scheme.
- •Mr. Sewell appealed, arguing that HMRC's incorrect advice led to the rejection.
Legal Principles
DIY refund scheme under section 35 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA).
VATA Section 35
Definition of a 'building designed as a dwelling' under Note 2 to Group 5 of Schedule 8 to VATA.
VATA Schedule 8, Note 2
Tribunal's jurisdiction to strike out appeals (lack of jurisdiction or no reasonable prospect of success).
First-tier Tribunal Rules, Rule 8
First-tier Tribunal's lack of jurisdiction to enforce common law duties of public bodies (judicial review jurisdiction resides with the Upper Tribunal).
HMRC v Hok Ltd [2012] UKUT 363
Outcomes
Appeal struck out.
The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to consider Mr. Sewell's claim based on HMRC's incorrect advice. The claim essentially constituted a challenge to HMRC's administrative action, requiring judicial review, a jurisdiction the First-tier Tribunal does not possess.