Foy Wealth Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 19 October 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1061 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
Foy Wealth Limited challenged HMRC decisions of 2 July 2018 (compulsory VAT registration, assessment and penalty) on the ground that its 26 July 2018 request for a statutory review was never notified as concluded by HMRC. The Tribunal found the July 2018 correspondence was a valid review request, that no document before the Tribunal amounted to a notification of review conclusions (so no "conclusion date" under s.83(7) VATA 1994 arose), and therefore under s.83(5) the appellant acquired the right to appeal once the review period expired; the 8 January 2026 appeal was not out of time and the appeal was ordered to proceed. The Tribunal did not decide the alternative late-permission application or the substantive merits.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
Where HMRC are required to carry out a statutory review and fail to notify the conclusions within the statutory procedure, the absence of any document notifying those conclusions means no "conclusion date" has occurred under s.83(7) VATA 1994; consequently s.83(5) allows the taxpayer to bring an appeal from the end of the review period even though no conclusion date has arisen and the 30-day period in s.83(3)(b) may therefore not start to run.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
A witness statement filed in separate insolvency proceedings (supporting a winding-up petition) which was not issued as part of the statutory review process and did not purport to communicate review outcomes is unlikely to constitute notification of review conclusions. The judgment also noted that the statutory scheme can produce a situation where a deemed conclusion (s.83(8)) gives rise to an appeal window under s.83(5) without a corresponding "conclusion date" triggering s.83(3)(b).