Richard Warner v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 5 September 2023
Neutral citation: [2023] UKFTT 751 (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
Mr Warner bought two adjacent plots in May 2016, submitted SDLT returns treating them as non‑residential, and sought multiple dwelling relief (MDR) in July 2018 which HMRC refused as out of time. The First-tier Tribunal held HMRC had not made an appealable decision (no enquiry opened, no closure notice) and that the statutory 12‑month amendment limit could not be extended by the proviso in paragraph 6(3); nor could the MDR claim be recast as an overpayment claim to avoid those time limits. The appeal was struck out for want of jurisdiction.
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’s ratio is that a time‑barred written refusal of a late MDR claim does not constitute a notice of intention to enquire or otherwise create an appealable decision; the phrase "except as otherwise provided" in paragraph 6(3) refers to specific statutory exceptions and does not permit a general extension of the 12‑month amendment period; and MDR must be pursued by return or amendment under the prescribed procedure and cannot be converted into an overpayment claim to evade the statutory time limits.
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 observed that routine correspondence from debt management suggesting additional time to submit a formal MDR application may encourage a taxpayer but does not itself amount to an enquiry by the stamp duty office; and that post‑transaction events such as ill health, lender liquidation or planning delays did not bear on the jurisdictional question of whether HMRC had made an appealable decision.