Tax analysis: In The Gala Film Partners, LLP v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) disallowed relief in respect of £111m of partnership losses for 2003–04 on the basis that the business was not trading with a view to profit. Loss relief against other income of the individual partners was also denied, as was loan interest relief for buying into the partnership.

Tax analysis: In Sarabande, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) decided that the appellant, Sarabande (SB) did not make an exempt supply of land to its subsidiary, and therefore HMRC’s denial of input tax incurred on acquiring and refurbishing a property was invalid.

Tax analysis: In NHS Ayrshire & Arran Health Board v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) found that the construction of a secure mental health unit for children did not qualify for zero-rating as it was classified as part of a ‘hospital or similar institution’.

Tax analysis: In Realbuzz Group Ltd v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) allowed a software company’s appeal against a discovery assessment. The assessment was made to withdraw research and development (R&D) relief, but the FTT held that the statutory restriction for ‘available information’ applied so that the assessment was invalid.

Tax analysis: In Sammy Garden Ltd v HMRC the First-Tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) found in HMRC’s favour that VAT should have been accounted for from the effective date of registration (EDR), rather than receipt of the VAT registration number (VRN).

Tax analysis: In Milton Park Holdings Ltd and another v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) held that the taxpayer was not entitled to tax deductions for the amortisation of purchased goodwill under the corporation intangibles regime on the basis that it did not acquire a business for the purposes of UK GAAP.

Tax analysis: In Barclays Bank plc, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) considered the tax treatment of debt instruments called Reserve Capital Instruments (RCIs) issued by Barclays Bank plc (BBPLC) and whether BBPLC could claim loan relationship debits in relation to an accruing discount shown in its accounts for those instruments. The FTT dismissed BBPLC’s appeal against HMRC’s decision to disallow the loan relationship debits.

Tax analysis: In Chris Poulton v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) dismissed HMRC’s application to strike out the appellant’s claim for a VAT refund under the DIY Housebuilders Scheme. The appellant had been incorrectly charged VAT by a supplier and sought to apply the Reemtsma principle to reclaim the VAT from HMRC. The FTT considered that the point was arguable and therefore did not accede to the strike out request.

Tax analysis: In Patel v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal against an assessment for Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) on the purchase of a partly completed development with planning permission to convert two properties into one house. The FTT held that the properties were in the process of being constructed or adapted for use as a dwelling so that the residential rate of SDLT applied.

Tax analysis: In Visual Investments, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) dismissed an appeal against assessments disallowing VAT on legal services the appellant had claimed as input tax. The FTT found that the appellant was not the sole recipient of the legal services and, even to the extent that it was the recipient, there was not a direct and immediate link between the legal services and the appellant’s taxable supplies.

Private Client analysis: This tax appeal concerned the correct inheritance tax (IHT) treatment of donations made to various political campaigning organisations, which were primarily concerned with campaigning for the UK to leave the EU. The taxpayer argued that the donations were exempt from IHT on two grounds, relying on sections 21 and 24 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984). The FTT dismissed the appeal on both grounds, holding that the donations were subject to IHT. The decision, while only a first instance decision, provides helpful guidance on the test for ‘normal expenditure’ for the purposes of IHTA 1984, s 21(1)(a), which prior to this decision had received limited consideration by the courts and tribunals. Written by Alice Defriend, barrister at Devereux Chambers.

Tax analysis: In Smart v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal against assessments and a closure notice charging income tax on distributions paid by entities forming part of a multinational group in one part of which the taxpayer was a partner in an LLP. The FTT held that he was the person ‘receiving or entitled’ to the income and rejected his alternative argument that it should act on the basis that a court would have ordered rescission of various documents under which the income was paid.