UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/2023/00099 - [2025] UKUT 00013 (TCC)

The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal to the FTT, dated 24 June 2019, said that the “desired outcome” was that “we would like the Tribunal to vacate the assessment”. The FTT Grounds were attached and read as follows:

“1.

These are the grounds on which the Appellant notifies its appeal to the Tribunal against the decision made by the Respondent on 7th January 2019.

2.

By that decision, the Respondent disallowed the Appellant’s input tax claimed since commencement of the business. The decision did not reference the legislative basis on which it was made.

3.

The Appellant appeals to the Tribunal on the grounds that the claim for input tax is valid and correctly due.

4.

The Respondent's decision was issued on 7th January 2019 based on the Investigating Officer's view that he had not been supplied with enough evidence of the input tax deducted for the entire trading history of the Appellant.

5.

The Assessment relevant to this decision is dated 6th February 2019 which related to periods 05/16 to 11/18.

6.

The Respondent has been invited to inspect the business records at the Principal Place of Business. This invitation was declined on the same day that the assessment for £34,185,989 was received in the post by the Appellant and again on 14th February 2019.

7.

It is the Appellant’s stated position that the Respondent’s decision to deny a VAT input tax claim is incorrect because there is evidence to demonstrate that:

a.

The Appellant correctly charges VAT on its supply made to customers. This charge meets the definition of output tax at Section 25 of the VAT Act 1994.

b.

The supply included VAT which meets the definition of input tax at Section 24 of the VAT Act 1994 and, therefore, the claim for a deduction should be allowed in full.

c.

The Appellant holds evidence to demonstrate that it receives payment for the supply that it makes to customers in the form of a bank account into which payments are deposited and has made this evidence available to the Respondent.

d.

The Appellant holds evidence that its supply chain is valid and has correctly been charged VAT relevant to the supply of labour services and has made this evidence available to the Respondent.

e.

The Appellant holds evidence that it received a supply of taxable services for which it made payment which included an element associated with VAT and has made this evidence available to the Respondent.

f.

The Respondent incorrectly states that “no evidence” has been provided which is absolutely not the case. The Appellant cooperated with providing information, however due to an unreasonable amount of records being requested the Appellant requested that evidence be reviewed at the Principle [sic] Place of Business.

g.

Having regard to these facts there are no valid grounds for the Respondent to deny the reclaim of VAT input tax.

8.

The Appellant requests the Tribunal to quash the Respondents’ decision for the reasons set out in these grounds of appeal.”