
The First Tier Tribunal (FTT) has delivered a decisive judgement in favour of Southampton-based Deos Group. The company challenged HMRC’s refusal to accept over £1.29 million in input VAT claims and a penalty exceeding £364,000. The VAT fraud appeal case against HMRC focused on whether Deos was aware, or should have been aware, that its supply chain was involved in VAT fraud.
Deos Group, a small business that traditionally sold and leased office equipment, expanded into wholesale consumer electronics during 2021. This move into the ‘grey market’ brought the business under HMRC’s spotlight.
In spring 2022, Deos carried out 18 purchases from one supplier. The input VAT on these transactions totalled £1,299,083.69. HMRC rejected the claims and added a penalty under section 69C of the VAT Act 1994, arguing that the transactions were connected to fraudulent VAT evasion.
According to HMRC, the disputed transactions were tied to fraudulent VAT losses under the Kittel principle. This principle, drawn from European case law, prevents recovery of VAT where the trader knew, or should have known, of fraud in the chain of supply.
The case built by HMRC suggested that unusual pricing patterns and the profile of the supplier should have raised concerns for Deos. HMRC contended that the company either possessed or should have possessed knowledge of fraud associated with the supplies.
The Kittel principle was central to this dispute. It stipulates that VAT cannot be reclaimed on transactions linked to fraud if a trader was, or ought to have been, aware of it. Critics say this principle introduces subjectivity: HMRC can allege that any deviation from its ideal trading model signals knowledge of fraud, even when the trader has no direct connection. For Deos, the question was whether it met the standard of due diligence expected of a reasonable trader.
Deos, advised by David Bedenham KC of Keystone Law, argued that it had acted responsibly and carried out appropriate checks. The company stated that its business reasons for entering into the transactions were legitimate and commercially sound.
It was further argued that HMRC’s conclusions were speculative, relying on inferences rather than firm evidence. Documentation and due diligence records were provided to support Deos’s position that it conducted itself in good faith.
The Tribunal assessed whether Deos had actual knowledge, or whether a reasonable trader in its position should have known, that the purchases were connected to fraud.
Judge Zachary Citron found that Deos did not cross this threshold. The ruling recognised that:
While acknowledging that fraud existed elsewhere in the supply chain, the Tribunal held that HMRC had not shown Deos to be aware of, or complicit in, that fraud.
The appeal was allowed in full. HMRC’s disallowance of £1.29 million in input VAT was overturned, and the related penalty of £364,220.64 was cancelled.
The judgement underlines an important principle: businesses should not bear penalties for fraud in the supply chain unless there is compelling proof that they knew, or deliberately ignored, such connections. It demonstrates that commercial reasoning and documented due diligence can protect traders against unsubstantiated allegations.
The Deos Group VAT fraud appeal was heard at Taylor House, London, with the decision issued on 21 August 2025. Following the outcome, HMRC announced it was reviewing the judgement and considering its options.
The appeal by the Deos Group regarding VAT fraud against HMRC is a clear reminder of how important evidence-based decision-making is in tax disputes. From our perspective, the case demonstrates that HMRC cannot rely on assumptions or speculative inferences when challenging a business. A trader’s responsibility is to carry out reasonable due diligence, but the burden of proof remains with HMRC.
This ruling provides reassurance that when proper checks are in place and records are maintained, businesses should not be unfairly penalised for fraud elsewhere in the supply chain. At Apex Accountants, we view this outcome as a significant precedent that strengthens the position of compliant companies who operate in good faith.
At Apex Accountants, we support businesses facing VAT challenges with clear guidance and practical solutions. Whether you need advice on compliance, help with due diligence, or representation in a dispute, our team is here to assist. Get in touch today to discuss how we can safeguard your business.
Slow adoption despite clear government deadlines HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) achieved a major milestone on 6 April 2026, when...
A recent case in Shetland has put the spotlight on VAT fraud and confiscation orders in the UK. A businessman...
Since April 2025, the UK government has abolished the Furnished Holiday Lettings (FHL) tax regime, aligning short-term rental profits with...
A cautionary tale of unpaid taxes In mid-April 2026, the Insolvency Service disqualified Alex Shorthose from serving as a director...
From 6 April 2026, self-employed childminders with qualifying income over £50,000 must use Making Tax Digital for Income Tax. The...
A sticky dispute that went all the way back to tribunal In late March 2026 the First‑tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)...
In a recent case in Glasgow, two restaurant owners were found guilty of carrying out nearly a £700,000 VAT fraud...
Starbucks UK’s tax credit situation highlights that sales growth does not necessarily lead to tax liabilities. Despite reporting a turnover...
The UK’s new packaging EPR rules (often called the “packaging tax”) took effect on 1 January 2025. Any company with...
Close companies (broadly, those controlled by five or fewer shareholders or participators) and their owners have new reporting requirements under...