Tax

H Ripley & Co Ltd v Revenue & Customs (Strike-out application�whether evidence wholly defective)

[2020] UKFTT TC TC07558First-tier Tribunal (Tax)2020

Get the AI brief for this case

Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.

Quick orient — first passages from judgment

Strike-out application�whether evidence wholly defective - zero-rated removal of goods to another member State �application refused"

Sitting in public at Taylor House 88 Rosebery Avenue, London, on 16 January 2020

Mr Tarlochan Lall counsel, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor to HM Revenue and Customs for the Respondents

This is an application by HMRC to strike out the Appellant�s appeal under Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 (�the Tribunal Rules�) because the Appellant�s case has �no reasonable prospect of success�.

HMRC made this application on 18 March 2019 because they contend that the Appellant�s claim for repayment of an amount representing disallowed credit on zero-rated supplies has no reasonable prospect of success.

Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

More Tax cases

Ferguson & Anor v Revenue and Customs (STAMP DUTY LAND TAX - residential property - whether paddock was part of garden or grounds of dwelling - paddock was part of grounds)

[2026] UKFTT TC 238

MWL International Ltd & Anor v Revenue and Customs (NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS - agreement with inspector of taxes that certain cars would be "pooled cars" for NICs purposes if various conditions satisfied - HMRC subsequently sought to collect NICs retrospectively - whether HMRC estopped from doing so - whether the FTT had jurisdiction to decide whether Appellants had legitimate expectation that decisions would not be retrospective)

[2026] UKUT TCC 62

BGC Services Holdings LLP v Revenue and Customs (Determinations under Reg 80 of the PAYE Regs - whether it appeared to HMRC that there may be tax payable)

[2026] UKFTT TC 558

Best Cosmetics Ltd v Revenue and Customs (IMPORT VAT - Postponed VAT Accounting - importer not VAT registered - post-clearance demand notices issued for unpaid VAT - no evidence that postponed VAT was accounted for)

[2026] UKFTT TC 236

Nwaneri v Revenue and Customs (Income tax - Expenses incurred in the performance of duties of employment - Travel expenses - Subsistence expenses - Whether deductible - Penalties - Whether behaviour deliberate)

[2026] UKFTT TC 581

Ivey v Revenue and Customs (Strike Out - Jurisdiction)

[2026] UKFTT TC 233

Common Room

Discussion

0 comments · About the Common Room →

No comments yet — start the discussion.

Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.

Tax