Join Her Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 15 May 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 724 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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

Join Her Ltd appealed HMRC's 9 October 2025 decision reducing its input tax to nil. HMRC withdrew that decision before the Tribunal and the Tribunal struck the appeal out, holding it lacked jurisdiction because the decision under challenge had been withdrawn; HMRC then issued a replacement decision on 18 February 2026 and the Tribunal directed any challenge be brought to that extant decision.

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

Withdrawal of an administrative decision removes the decision as an appealable matter and thus divests the Tribunal of jurisdiction to determine an appeal against that withdrawn decision; rule 8(2)(a) of the FTT Rules can require strike-out where no jurisdiction remains and is distinct from rule 8(1).

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

The notes record remarks suggesting HMRC may, under regulation 29(2) of the VAT Regulations 1995, exercise discretion to accept alternative evidence of input tax where prescribed documentation is absent, and that the Tribunal may retain jurisdiction over ancillary matters (for example costs) even where the substantive appeal has been struck out; these observations appear non-binding.

Warning

This chunk contains repeated and duplicated passages which may make some passages difficult to follow. Notes show repeated and duplicated passages and may be materially incomplete.