Mochars Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC

Mochars Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC

HMRC was not under a legal duty to alert the Appellant to the possibility of providing alternative evidence under regulation 29(2), and properly exercised its discretion in refusing the input tax claims for the 24 transactions due to the complete lack of corroborative evidence despite repeated requests.

Parties
Appellant: Mochars Ltd; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
VAT Repayment, Input Tax Claims, VAT Invoices, Discretion Under VAT Regulations, Alternative Evidence for VAT Claims
Tax Law VAT Repayment Input Tax Claims VAT Invoices Discretion Under VAT Regulations Alternative Evidence for VAT Claims

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mochars Ltd

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC was obliged to alert the taxpayer to the possibility of providing alternative evidence under regulation 29(2) of the VAT Regulations
  2. 2 Whether HMRC properly exercised its discretion under regulation 29(2) in refusing input tax claims where no invoices or alternative evidence were provided

Ratio Decidendi

HMRC was not under a legal duty to alert the Appellant to the possibility of providing alternative evidence under regulation 29(2), and properly exercised its discretion in refusing the input tax claims for the 24 transactions due to the complete lack of corroborative evidence despite repeated requests.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed