UT/2024/000070 - [2025] UKUT 00210 (TCC)

The Appellant’s core ground of appeal is that the FTT’s overall conclusion was not one that was reasonably open to it. The Appellant further argues that the FTT erred by examining categories of evidence in isolation rather than considering them cumulatively. Although the FTT referred in its conclusion at [148] to “none of the documents (individually or taken as a whole) relied upon by [the Company] evidence the export…” the Appellant argues that that was a mere “verbal formula” and that the FTT did not in fact carry out the holistic assessment it claimed to.

HMRC submits that the FTT was entitled to reach the conclusion it did. As discussed, the key issue, as framed by HMRC, is whether the Appellant held valid commercial evidence within three months of the supplies being removed from the UK, not whether later-produced evidence shows that removal occurred. HMRC notes that the FTT did consider the totality of the evidence and concluded that none of the documents, individually or collectively, satisfied the evidential requirements of VAT Notice 725.