Beta This part of GOV.UK is being rebuilt – find out what beta means

HMRC internal manual

VAT Refunds

Claims for overdeclared output tax: Definition of a claim: When is a claim a new claim

In its decision in University of Liverpool (VAT Tribunal decision 16769); [2001] BVC 2088, the VAT & Duties Tribunal described a completed claim as:

“… a claim which:

(a) has been met in full by the Commissioners;

(b) has been met in part by the Commissioners and the time limit for appealing against the rejection of the remainder prescribed by rule 4(1) of the VAT Tribunals Rules 1986, as amended, has expired;

(c) has been met in part by the Commissioners, the taxpayer has appealed against the rejection of the remainder, his appeal has been determined either by the tribunal or a court and the time limit prescribed for appealing against that determination has expired or the appeal has been compromised;

(d) has been rejected in full by the Commissioners and the time limit for appealing against that rejection prescribed by rule 4(1) of the VAT Tribunals Rules 1986, as amended, has expired;

(e) has been rejected in full by the Commissioners, the taxpayer has appealed against that rejection, his appeal has been determined either by the tribunal or a court and the time limit prescribed for appealing against that determination has expired, or the appeal has been compromised.”

Any claim that follows a completed claim is a new claim. This is important where the ‘follow-up’ claim is made out-of-time, see VR2800.

It is also important to note that a claim is defined by the issue upon which it is based.

For example if Able Ltd makes a claim on 17 March 2011 for output tax overdeclared on the sale of X-Type Widgets, that claim can go back to the accounting period ending on 31 March 2007. If on 12 August 2011 the company makes a further claim for output tax overdeclared on the sale of E-Type Widgets, which is a new and separate claim and can only go back to the accounting period ending on 30 September 2007 (assuming that the claimant is on stagger 1 - calendar quarters).

The decision in University of Liverpool was later endorsed by the Tribunal in the decisions in John Martin Group (VAT Tribunal Decision 19257); [2006] BVC 4025, The London Institute (now known as the University of the Arts, London) (VAT Tribunal decision 19362); [2006] BVC 4045 and The Medical House Plc (VAT Tribunal decision 19859); [2007] BVC 4037.