![TC09674 - [2025] UKFTT 01273 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png){kind=logo}
Introduction
Introduction
This decision relates to two appeals by the Appellant, Oriental Bu Trading Limited (“OBT”), against decisions of the Respondents, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (“HMRC”), in relation to value added tax (“VAT”).
The first appeal, which has reference number TC/2023/08157, is an appeal by OBT against HMRC’s decision on 10 February 2023 to reduce OBT’s input tax credit for the 10/21 period from £782,239.00 to £205,056.00. This appeal was made under section 83(1)(c) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (“VATA”).
The second appeal, which has reference number TC/2023/08373, relates to assessments issued by HMRC on 5 May 2023 under section 73 VATA in the aggregate amount of £2,074,501.26 in respect of periods from 11/21 to 11/22. This appeal was made under section 83(1)(p) VATA.
Both appeals concerned input VAT on purchases by OBT of luxury goods such as high-value clothes and watches from certain suppliers in the UK for export primarily to China. The underlying reason for the denial of input tax credit and the assessments was the same for both appeals. In summary, it was that OBT did not hold a valid VAT invoice or satisfactory alternative evidence of the payment of VAT on the purchase of certain high-value watches.
The hearing of the appeals took place over three days from 1 October 2025 to 3 October 2025. On 1 October 2025, the Tribunal heard opening submissions from Mr Firth KC and Mr Blades on behalf of OBT and evidence from several witnesses for OBT who were cross-examined for HMRC by Mr Matthews. On 2 October 2025, the Tribunal completed the hearing of evidence from the Appellant’s witnesses and then heard evidence from the HMRC officer responsible for the decisions to which we have referred above, Officer Neil Bamford. Officer Bamford was then cross-examined by Mr Firth KC on behalf of OBT.
That cross-examination was due to be completed on the morning of 3 October 2025 and then to be followed by closing submissions on behalf of both parties. However, on the morning of 3 October 2025, HMRC’s representatives informed the Tribunal that HMRC had withdrawn the decisions and the assessments that formed the subject of the appeals, and that the input tax that had been disallowed would be credited to OBT’s account. Ms Hickey and Mr Matthews agreed to send a copy of the relevant email to the Tribunal. They have since done so. Ms Hickey and Mr Matthews also submitted that the effect of the withdrawal of the decisions and the relative assessments was that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to determine the appeals and the appeals must be struck out.
Having heard argument on behalf of both parties, the Tribunal gave its decision at the hearing to strike out the proceedings under rule 8(2)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 (the “FTT Rules”) on the grounds that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction in relation to them. The Tribunal based its reasons for that decision on the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (“FTT”) in Align Technology Switzerland GmbH and Align Technology BV v HMRC [2024] UK FTT 001100 (TC) (“Align”). At Mr Firth KC’s request, the Tribunal also agreed to provide written reasons for its decision. This decision notice contains those written reasons.