![CA-2024-000806 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1259](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png){kind=logo}
Recoverable under Standard Method (£) Difference (£)
Recoverable under Standard Method (£)
Difference (£)
2012-13
1,629,304.28
870,054.37
276,981.73
593,072.64
2013-14
1,677,077.82
859,198.01
218,020.12
641,177.89
2014-15
1,232,885.61
648,707.29
172,603.99
476,103.30
2015-16
1,361,765.19
520,900.90
163,411.82
357,489.08
2016-17
1,705,065.27
815,620.23
221,658.49
593,961.74
2017-18
1,803,814.70
846,011.02
216,457.76
629,553.26
HMRC did not consider that HCL’s floorspace method produced a fair and reasonable result for the years in question (2012/13-2017/18). HMRC refused HCL’s proposed floorspace method for those periods (decision letters dated 18 January 2018 and 9 October 2020). HMRC upheld those decisions on internal reviews dated 11 July 2018 and 5 March 2021. HCL appealed.
- Heading
- Lady Justice Whipple Introduction
- Legal Framework
- “ Article 173
- Article 174
- “ Article 176
- HCL’s Supplies
- HCL’s Proposed Floorspace Method
- Recoverable under Standard Method (£) Difference (£)
- Decision of the FtT
- Decision of the UT
- Issues
- Issue 2: was the UT right to remake the decision in favour of HMRC?
- Discussion
- Issue 3: how does the Input Tax Order apply in the context of residual input tax apportionment? Introduction
- Discussion
- Conclusions