So are you saying that HMRC would not challenge any future CVA as long as the process was followed?
If so, what is your source for that information? Not saying it is wrong, but as I said before, I have yet to see anyone actually refute the claim that HMRC will take any future CVA all the way to the high court. Sorry, for clarification, when I say 'process' I really mean the whole basis of the CVA, in other words creditors not all treated equally. A better word might have been 'validity'. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:leedslist- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickD > Sent: 31 August 2007 15:53 > To: leedslist > Subject: Re: [LU] LU: Taxman drops Leeds Utd legal challenge > > ----- Original Message ----- > > 2. Try to understand this - the CVA is a flawed and illegal process > as far > as HMRC are concerned. That is what they believe and that is what they > want > to test in court and will do so over and over again. The CVA process > can go > hrough as cleanly as Snow White's knickers but the process itself is > covered in cack, according to HMRC. Can you not see the distinction? > > Completely wrong > > > _______________________________________________ > the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list > administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions > of contributors. > Leedslist mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist > Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
