TriCell LTD (fka TCLL)

[Hk Fooey]

N2J Ltd v HMRC
Chancery Division, 3 June 2009
N2J was refused zero-rating of certain goods that
it thought had been exported. HMRC denied that
there was any evidence of export and N2J was
unable to persuade the Tribunal that the goods
had in fact left the UK.
N2J attacked the Tribunal’s decision on several
grounds:
• that the Tribunal had concentrated on
whether N2J had taken steps to avoid being
involved with fraudulent transactions, when HMRC
had at no point accused N2J of fraud;
• that the Tribunal had not explicitly found that
the goods had not been exported;
• that a CMR consignment notice (which in this
case stated that the goods had been exported)
was conclusive evidence of the facts stated on its
face; and
• that once HMRC had accepted a CMR as valid
it could not later refuse to acknowledge its validity.
The Judge rejected all of these arguments.
The Tribunal had concluded that the goods had
not been exported and that was determinative of
the case, unless an incorrect CMR was conclusive
evidence, which under established law it was not
(see R (oao Teleos plc & others) v CCE Case C-
409/04 [2007] ECR I-7797).

http://www.theiit.org.uk/ITV109.pdf