“ You explained . There was a short term advantage for the business (Foneart), in purchasing 3G IPhones, originally issued from August 2010. Apple would only sell from their stores in the UK, and not use wholesale distributors. This had created a new market for traders, who have exploited the short term imbalances between the supply of Apple IPhones, and the sale only to retail purchasers visiting the Apple stores. This window of opportunity was expected to last 5 months. These intermediate traders use family members, or in the instance of LCC Ltd- you were to use 7 employed family/friends who visit the Apple stores to make purchases in quantities of 2 per visit.”
“13. When I was buying the phones Gitesh and Neeta had told me to give the company name when the sales persons asked for a name, however, sometimes at the time the sales staff would ask for a name sometimes they did not. Then they print out the receipt without checking properly about the name. It was difficult for me to explain, sometimes they would not listen. Sometimes an Indian name is hard for other people to understand . It was tiring and sometimes a nightmare. If they did not hear me properly they would just print anything and give me a receipt.”
“it is established on the authorities that the knowledge of a person who acquires it as a director of one company will not be imputed to another company of which he is also a director, unless he owes, not only a duty to the second company to receive it, but also a duty to the first company to communicate it.”
“30. Accordingly in the absence of specific rules governing proof of the right to deduct input tax, Member States have the power to require production of the original invoice in order to establish that right, as well as the power, where a taxable person no longer holds the originals to admit other evidence that the transaction in respect of which the deduction is claimed actually took place. In Jeunehomme and others v Belgian State the Court at paragraph 17 stated: “17. However, the requirement on the invoice of particulars other than those set out in Article 22 (3) (b) of the Sixth Directive, as a condition for the exercise of the right to deduction, must be limited to what is necessary to ensure the correct levying of value-added tax and permit supervision by the tax authorities. Moreover, such particulars must not, by reason of their number or technical nature, render the exercise of the right to deduction practically impossible or obsessively difficult.”
“GK said the boxes were sealed with brown tape and plastic security tape. GK said the stock belonged to AK (Armit), LCA Ltd”
“The test for the exercise of this tribunal’s supervisory jurisdiction is whether, in relation to the materials which were before the Commissioners when they made their decision, their refusal to allow the input tax deduction was a decision that no reasonable commissioners could have taken. In order to successful in its appeal, the Appellant has to show that the Commissioners’ decision was unreasonable (including disproportionality as a type of unreasonableness) having regard to their legitimate requirements both to be satisfied that the alleged supplies to the Appellant took place and also to operate procedures which appear to them to be necessary to prevent fraudulent claims…”