Esheria United Kingdom Case Law
Sign in
United Kingdom Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

United Kingdom Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter United Kingdom case law

Results update automatically as you type.

United Kingdom decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Tax-law [2026] UKFTT 657 (TC)

Sweetmotion Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - Kittel - fast moving consumer goods - knew or should have known - company penalty - mitigation)

Sweetmotion Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - Kittel - fast moving consumer goods - knew or should have known - company penalty - mitigation) [2026] UKFTT 657 (TC) (05 May 2026)

The tribunal upheld a Kittel-based VAT input tax denial in part and reduced a VAT company penalty, finding Sweetmotion should have known of fraud from 19 January 2021.

  • Vat-fraud
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Kittel-principle
  • Company-penalty
  • Mitigation-of-penalty
  • Penalty-mitigation
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2026] UKFTT 657

Sweetmotion Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - Kittel - fast moving consumer goods - knew or should have known - company penalty - mitigation)

Sweetmotion Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - Kittel - fast moving consumer goods - knew or should have known - company penalty - mitigation) [2026] UKFTT 657 (TC) (05 May 2026)

The tribunal upheld a VAT input tax denial for trades linked to fraudulent suppliers, finding the appellant should have known of the fraud from 19 January 2021.

  • Vat-fraud
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Kittel-principle
  • Company-penalty
  • Mitigation-of-penalty
  • Vat-penalties
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2026] UKFTT 97 (TC)

Tasca Tankers Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Denial of relief for input tax on the basis that the Appellant knew or should have known that the supplies were connected to the fraudulent evasion of VAT)

Tasca Tankers Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Denial of relief for input tax on the basis that the Appellant knew or should have known that the supplies were connected to the fraudulent evasion of VAT) [2026] UKFTT 97 (TC) (09 January 2026)

The Tribunal dismissed Tasca Tankers Ltd’s VAT appeal, upholding HMRC’s denial of input tax recovery under Kittel and refusal of zero-rating for insufficient removal evidence.

  • Vat-fraud
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Zero-rating-of-intra-eu-supplies
  • Evidentiary-requirements-for-vat
  • Kittel-principle
  • Due-diligence-in-vat-transactions
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2026] UKFTT 97

Tasca Tankers Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Denial of relief for input tax on the basis that the Appellant knew or should have known that the supplies were connected to the fraudulent evasion of VAT)

Tasca Tankers Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Denial of relief for input tax on the basis that the Appellant knew or should have known that the supplies were connected to the fraudulent evasion of VAT) [2026] UKFTT 97 (TC) (09 January 2026)

The tribunal dismissed Tasca Tankers Ltd’s appeal, upholding HMRC’s denial of input tax deduction under Kittel and refusing zero-rating for alleged exports to Ireland.

  • Vat-fraud
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Zero-rating-of-intra-community-supplies
  • Evidential-requirements-for-vat-relief
  • Kittel-principle
  • Zero-rating
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2025] UKFTT 1601

AA Com Ltd & Ors v Revenue and Customs (VAT - whether acting as agents)

AA Com Ltd & Ors v Revenue and Customs (VAT - whether acting as agents) [2025] UKFTT 1601 (TC) (17 December 2025)

The Tribunal dismissed VAT appeals by AA Com Ltd, Victory Telecom Ltd and Kashif Javaid, upholding assessments, penalties and attribution for deliberate inaccuracies.

  • Value-added-tax
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Reverse-charge-mechanism
  • Agency-vs-principal
  • Vat-penalties
  • Attribution-of-penalties-to-officers
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2025] UKFTT 1601 (TC)

AA Com Ltd & Ors v Revenue and Customs (VAT - whether acting as agents)

AA Com Ltd & Ors v Revenue and Customs (VAT - whether acting as agents) [2025] UKFTT 1601 (TC) (17 December 2025)

The tribunal dismissed VAT appeals by AA Com Ltd, Victory Telecom Ltd and Kashif Javaid, upholding assessments, penalties and penalty attribution for deliberate inaccuracies.

  • Vat
  • Agency-vs-principal
  • Reverse-charge
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Penalties
  • Attribution-of-penalties
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2025] UKFTT 1602

Littlewoods Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - whether costs incurred in the creation of product specific photographs for use in catalogues and/or in connection with the online retail store were directly and immediately linked to finance transactions made to fund purchases)

Littlewoods Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VAT - whether costs incurred in the creation of product specific photographs for use in catalogues and/or in connection with the online retail store were directly and immediately linked to finance transactions made to fund purchases) [2025] UKFTT 1602 (TC) (16 December 2025)

The Tribunal held that product-specific photography costs were attributable only to taxable retail supplies, not exempt finance or insurance, and allowed Littlewoods’ appeal.

  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Attribution-of-costs
  • Partially-exempt-businesses
  • Direct-and-immediate-link
  • Marketing-expenditure
  • Online-retail
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2025] UKFTT 1278

TSI Instruments Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX - Credit for import VAT as input tax - Importer not owner of goods - whether goods used for the purposes of the business carried on by the taxpayer - Article 168 Principal VAT Directive - ss 24-27 Value Added Tax Act 1994 - EU principle of fiscal neutrality - extent of Marleasing principle)

TSI Instruments Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX - Credit for import VAT as input tax - Importer not owner of goods - whether goods used for the purposes of the business carried on by the taxpayer - Article 168 Principal VAT Directive - ss 24-27 Value Added Tax Act 1994 - EU principle of fiscal neutrality - extent of Marleasing principle) [2025] UKFTT 1278 (TC) (29 October 2025)

The First-tier Tribunal held that TSI Instruments Ltd could not deduct import VAT as input tax where it was not the owner of the goods and the goods’ value was not reflected in its repair charges.

  • Value-added-tax
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Import-vat
  • Fiscal-neutrality
  • Interpretation-of-eu-directives
  • Ownership-requirement-for-vat-deduction
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2025] UKFTT 1278 (TC)

TSI Instruments Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX - Credit for import VAT as input tax - Importer not owner of goods - whether goods used for the purposes of the business carried on by the taxpayer - Article 168 Principal VAT Directive - ss 24-27 Value Added Tax Act 1994 - EU principle of fiscal neutrality - extent of Marleasing principle)

TSI Instruments Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX - Credit for import VAT as input tax - Importer not owner of goods - whether goods used for the purposes of the business carried on by the taxpayer - Article 168 Principal VAT Directive - ss 24-27 Value Added Tax Act 1994 - EU principle of fiscal neutrality - extent of Marleasing principle) [2025] UKFTT 1278 (TC) (29 October 2025)

The tribunal dismissed TSI Instruments’ appeal over import VAT input tax, holding that a non-owner importer could not deduct VAT where the goods’ value was not reflected in output prices.

  • Value-added-tax
  • Input-tax-deduction
  • Import-vat
  • Fiscal-neutrality
  • Interpretation-of-eu-directives
  • Ownership-requirement-for-vat-deduction
Read case analysis
Tax-law [2025] UKFTT 878

Red Rose Payroll Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Missing Trader Intra Community ("MTIC") fraud in the temporary labour market, Whether the Appellant knew or ought to have known that the relevant transactions were connected with fraud)

Red Rose Payroll Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Missing Trader Intra Community ("MTIC") fraud in the temporary labour market, Whether the Appellant knew or ought to have known that the relevant transactions were connected with fraud) [2025] UKFTT 878 (TC) (18 July 2025)

The tribunal allowed Red Rose Payroll Ltd's appeal, finding HMRC had not proved the company knew or ought to have known its transactions were linked to VAT fraud.

  • Vat-fraud
  • Missing-trader-intra-community-(mtic)-fraud
  • Input-tax-deduction-denial
  • Supply-chain-due-diligence
  • Penalty-assessment
  • Vat-deregistration
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

United Kingdom decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.