The Tax Tribunal has accepted our position that the Tax Department did not carry out a proper investigation of all the facts, in order to verify that the company has changed its intentions for carrying out an economic activity, therefore the Tax Commissioner should have cancelled the VAT registration of the company instead of imposing VAT on the market value of the property.     

HM Revenue and Customs (UK) has accepted our position that the chartering of a vessel, which carried on board a Remotely Operated Vessel (ROV), handled by another sub-contractor for the purposes of research and mapping of the bottom of the UK’s seas, was not a land related services (as the English Tax Advisors were suggesting) and therefore the owner of the vessel was not liable to register in the UK Vat registry and charge UK Vat.

The court has accepted our position that the reversal of a decision taken by the previous Tax Commissioner, who accepted our tax objection, after new initiatives and recommendations by one of the tax assessors to the new Tax Commissioner, was not supported by new facts and it was illegal. The judge mentioned that “In this case, for the reasons I have explained above, I consider that the new assessment of the same, unchanged facts, without having any incidents, criminal or other, between the new decision and the second decision, makes the reversal of the first decision as illegal”.

​