Raj Sehgal v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 24 November 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 1439 (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
This appeal concerned whether a separately leased, titled storage unit acquired with a residential flat formed part of the dwelling for SDLT purposes or was a separate non‑residential interest. The First‑tier Tribunal held it had jurisdiction, found the storage unit was a separate transaction (and in any event not appurtenant or "subsisting for the benefit" of the flat), and concluded the storage unit was not residential property so non‑residential (Table B) rates apply. The appeal was allowed and HMRC's closure notice refusing refund was overturned.
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
The Tribunal treated "appurtenant" by reference to its land‑law meaning and held that a separate leasehold estate with its own legal existence is not apt to be appurtenant to another leasehold in the way easements are appurtenant. It also held that an interest "subsisting for the benefit" of a dwelling under FA 2003 s116(1)(c) requires identification with that particular dwelling, not merely a possible or transferable benefit among a class of dwellings; and that where relevant land includes any non‑residential element the statutory word "entirely" points to applying the non‑residential rates.
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 Tribunal declined to adopt an "updating construction" equating s116(1)(c) with the later Sch 4ZA para 18(4), and made observations invoking ejusdem generis to support a narrower meaning of "pertaining" akin to "appurtenant." It also noted, as a practical comment, that the statutory outcome can produce results that may seem disproportionate to the relative values of the items.