![UT/2023/000115 - [2025] UKUT 00004 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_ICfrj4g.png){kind=logo}
Conclusions
Item 1(c): Conclusion
We interpret Item 1(c) in conformity with Article 132(1)(o) as requiring that the event be “promoted as being for the raising of money”. On the basis of the FTT’s finding of fact at FTT[131] (set out at paragraph 67 above), the Show satisfied this requirement. Therefore, HMRC’s appeal in relation to Ground 2 is dismissed.
disposition
HMRC’s appeal against the FTT’s decision to allow the 2016 repayment claim by the Society is dismissed.
MR JUSTICE EDWIN JOHNSON
JUDGE THOMAS SCOTT
Release date: 09 January 2025
- Heading
- Introduction
- factual background
- relevant legislation
- the decision and the grounds of appeal
- the eu law position in summary
- ground 1: item 1(b): an event “whose primary purpose is the raising of money”
- HMRC’s arguments
- Item 1(b):Approach to construction
- Discussion
- ground 2: item 1(c): an event “that is promoted as being primarily for the raising of money”
- HMRC’s arguments
- Relevant EU law principles
- Issues raised
- Is Item 1(c) ultra vires the PVD?
- A conforming interpretation of Item 1(c)
- Direct effect
- Conclusions