• Home
  • Business taxes
  • Personal taxes
  • Capital taxes
  • International
  • VAT
  • Tax admin
  • Resources
  • Books
  • About
  • Contact
Claritax News
  • Home
  • Business taxes
  • Personal taxes
  • Capital taxes
  • International
  • VAT
  • Tax admin
  • Resources
  • Books
  • About
  • Contact
  • Business taxes
  • Personal taxes
  • Capital taxes
  • International
  • VAT
  • Tax admin
Claritax News

Disputed input VAT recovery – Harrods invoices were valid – HMRC’s treatment of Louis Viutton invoices was flawed – Athena Luxe Ltd 

12 Dec 2025

UPDATE: THE FTT HAS AWARDED COSTS AGAINST HMRC IN RESPECT OF THIS CASE – SEE THE CLARITAX NEWS STORY.

In the case of Athena Luxe Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1507 (TC), the FTT has allowed the company’s appeal against HMRC’s decision to deny input VAT recovery in respect of a number of disputed invoices.

VAT – Input tax – Whether Respondents were correct to deny Appellant’s claims for input tax credit – Appeal allowed

The company bought luxury goods to order for onward export to its clientele. HMRC sought to deny input VAT recovery on purchase invoices arguing that they were not valid and it was reasonable for HMRC to refuse to exercise their discretion under The VAT Regulations 1995, reg. 29 to accept the alternative evidence supplied.

However, the FTT did not agree. In respect of the Harrods invoices it judged that:

“as a matter of judicial comity (ie although not binding, the Tribunal would follow and apply a previous decision of the Tribunal in a similar case unless it considered the previous decision to be clearly wrong), applying Fount Construction (which we consider was correctly decided) to the present case we find that the Harrods invoice, when considered together with the corresponding till receipt, is a valid invoice that satisfies the requirement of regulation 14(1)(g). This is because, as we have noted at paragraph 8, above, it provides a description sufficient to identify the goods or services supplied.”

With regards to the Louis Viutton UK Ltd invoices, the FTT agreed that they were not valid but decided that HMRC’s decision not to exercise its discretion to allow alternative evidence was flawed for a number of reasons and that “having come to a conclusion that the decision was flawed, ie was unreasonable, we do not consider that HMRC’s decision would have inevitably been the same but for the flaw(s).”

https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukftt/tc/2025/1507

Related content from Claritax Books

Value Added Tax, written by Ciaran McGee MA (Oxon), FCA, CTA, is an extensive volume (over 1,000 pages), written primarily for non-VAT specialist accountants and tax advisers.

Value-Added-Tax

Latest articles (all topics)

  • Appellant failed to consult with HMRC before seeking extension of time – application refused – Future Fuels No. 1
  • EIS – insufficient evidence presented to prove company continued to meet trading requirement – My Club Web Services Ltd 
  • Agent Update – issue 148
  • ICAEW creates new independent commission to simplify tax system
Read more

Weekly email alerts

Sign up here for this free service.

wide banner

Recent Posts

  • Appellant failed to consult with HMRC before seeking extension of time – application refused – Future Fuels No. 1
  • EIS – insufficient evidence presented to prove company continued to meet trading requirement – My Club Web Services Ltd 
  • Agent Update – issue 148
  • ICAEW creates new independent commission to simplify tax system
  • The Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) (Amendment No. 3) Regulations 2026

Recent Comments

No comments to show.

©2026 All Rights Reserved

Terms & Conditions | Privacy

Copy