TC09596 - [2025] UKFTT 00895 (TC)

The burden of proof is on the Appellant to establish the correct amount of VAT that should be assessed. This is evident from the case C & E Coms v Pegasus Birds Ltd [2004] STC 1509; [2004] EWCA Civ 1015 (‘Pegasus Birds (2)’), where Carnwath LJ said this:

“[14] Generally, the burden lies on the taxpayer to establish the correct amount of tax due:

‘The element of guess-work and the almost unavoidable inaccuracy in a properly made best of judgment assessment, as the cases have established, do not serve to displace the validity of the assessments, which are prima facie right and remain right until the taxpayer shows that they are wrong and also shows positively what corrections should be made in order to make the assessments right or more nearly right.”

This was also explained by Mustill LJ in Brady (Inspector of Taxes) v Group Lotus Car Companies plc [1987] STC 635, at 642, as follows:

“The starting point is an ordinary appeal before the [Tribunal]. Here, however unacceptable the idea may be to the ordinary member of the public, it has been clear law binding on this court for sixty years that an inspector of taxes has only to raise an assessment to impose on the taxpayer the burden of proving that it is wrong: Haythornwaite & Sons Ltd v Kelly (Inspector of Taxes) (1927) 11 TC 657”

The standard of proof is the ordinary civil standard; that of a balance of probabilities.