Four more tax tribunal wins for taxpayers

Following the strong engagement with my recent article about the Sehgal SDLT decision, many readers asked a natural question:

“How often do taxpayers actually win at the tax tribunals, and is the system fair?”

It is easy to assume HMRC always holds the upper hand. They have deep pockets, specialist litigation teams, and the ability to pursue appeals through multiple tiers of the courts.
However, the reality is more balanced.

In the last couple of years, a number of taxpayers have succeeded at the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and the Upper Tribunal (UT), particularly in property-related SDLT and CGT disputes.

These outcomes show that the tribunals do apply the law independently, and that HMRC’s interpretation is not always upheld.

However, it is equally important to recognise that many of these taxpayers have endured:

• significant personal stress,
• potential six-figure legal costs,
• years of uncertainty, and
• the emotional burden of facing a government department in litigation.

Some will have benefited from legal expenses insurance, many others will not.

These cases, therefore, illustrate a difficult truth: Taxpayers can and do win, but the journey is rarely easy or inexpensive.

Below are four additional confirmed, property-related taxpayer wins from the last couple of years, each linking directly to an official judgment source, but first, a quick recap of the Sehgal case, making five in total.

1. Sehgal v HMRC (SDLT – Storage Unit Case)

[2025] UKFTT 1439 (TC) – Taxpayer won at FTT

• Purchase of a London apartment, parking space and separate basement storage unit for £18,250,000.
• HMRC treated the entire transaction as wholly residential.
• The Tribunal found the storage unit did not “subsist for the benefit of” the apartment, meaning the purchase was not entirely residential.
• Non-residential (mixed-use) SDLT rates applied.

Tax at stake: HMRC refused a refund of £1,749,250 SDLT, which the Tribunal ordered to be repaid.

Official judgment: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukftt/tc/2025/1439

2. Marie Guerlain-Desai v HMRC (SDLT – Woodland Not Grounds)

[2024] UKFTT 515 (TC) – Taxpayer won at FTT

• Durford House purchased for £3,160,000, including c.4 acres of formal garden and c.12 acres of woodland.
• HMRC argued the entire 16.6 acres formed the “grounds” of the dwelling.
• Tribunal held the woodland did not form part of the residential grounds.
• The transaction was therefore mixed-use, attracting non-residential SDLT rates.

Tax at stake

• Residential SDLT: £372,750
• Correct mixed-use SDLT: £147,500
• Refund due: £225,250

Official judgment: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukftt/tc/2024/515

3. HMRC v Taher & Zahra Suterwalla (SDLT – Paddock Case)

FTT: [2023] UKFTT 450 (TC)
UT: [2024] UKUT 188 (TCC)

Taxpayer won at FTT and upheld at the Upper Tribunal

• Purchase of a family home with gardens, pavilion, tennis court and an adjoining paddock.
• Taxpayers treated the paddock as non-residential (mixed-use).
• HMRC argued it formed part of the residential “grounds”.
• The FTT disagreed.
• HMRC appealed to the UT — and lost again.
• The UT confirmed the FTT was entitled to its conclusion.

Tax at stake

• Mixed-use SDLT: £169,500
• HMRC’s assessment: £330,750
• Difference: £161,250

Official judgment (Upper Tribunal): https://www.gov.uk/tax-and-chancery-tribunal-decisions/the-commissioners-for-his-majestys-revenue-and-customs-v-mr-taher-suterwalla-1-mrs-zahra-suterwalla-2-2024-ukut-00188-tcc 

4. Brzezicki v HMRC (SDLT – Trout Fishery Case)

[2024] UKFTT 845 (TC) – Taxpayer won at FTT

• Property comprising a house, garden, man-made carrier stream, island, and fishing cabin.
• Part of the land was used for a commercial trout-fishing operation.
• HMRC treated the entire property as residential.
• Tribunal found that a substantial element was genuinely non-residential, meaning mixed-use SDLT applied.

Tax at stake

• SDLT paid as residential: £132,250
• Correct mixed-use SDLT: £62,000
• Refund: £70,250

Official judgment (Open Justice Licence reproduction): https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/66f305e7a560d2391ca007bc

5. Nunn v HMRC (CGT – Private Residence Relief)

[2024] UKFTT 298 (TC) – Taxpayer won at FTT

• Landowner agreed to sell part of his garden for £295,000.
• HMRC argued the land had ceased to form part of the garden by the disposal date and raised a CGT bill.
• Tribunal found that a disposal occurred earlier, when the land did still form part of the garden.
• Private Residence Relief therefore applied.

Tax at stake

HMRC’s assessment:

• CGT: £72,633.80
• Suspended penalty: £20,155.87

Official judgment: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2024/TC09127.html

What Do These Cases Show?

HMRC does not always win

When the facts and law favour the taxpayer, the tribunals are willing to say so.

Tribunals scrutinise HMRC’s reasoning

In some cases the FTT goes one way, and the Upper Tribunal confirms it.

Property disputes often turn on fine distinctions

“Grounds”, “non-residential”, “subsisting for the benefit of”, “part of the dwelling”, none of these are simple.

The financial stakes can be enormous

£70,000…
£160,000…
£225,000…
£1.75 million…

These are not small disagreements.

Winning doesn’t mean the journey was easy

Most taxpayers face:

• multi-year enquiries,
• enormous stress,
• the cost of specialist representation,
• and the psychological burden of challenging HMRC.

Is the System Fair?

In principle: Yes.

The tribunals act independently and often rule against HMRC.

In practice: Not always.

• Litigation is expensive.
• Losing can be financially devastating.
• Cases can take years.
• HMRC has far more resources than any individual taxpayer.

Justice exists, but it is often expensive justice.

The fact that these taxpayers won shows the system can work.

The fact they had to fight so hard raises valid concerns about access to justice and equality of arms.

What Can Property Owners Take From This?

• HMRC’s view is not automatically the correct one.
• SDLT and CGT outcomes depend heavily on facts and documents.
• Mixed-use disputes are increasingly common.
• Tribunal outcomes can be unpredictable — judges have even described some results as “surprising”.
• Early structuring advice is far cheaper than a multi-year dispute.

Final Thoughts

Taxpayers do win, and these five cases prove it, but the road to victory is rarely smooth, and rarely cheap.

The tribunal system does function, but it also highlights the high stakes facing ordinary property owners when dealing with a well-resourced HMRC.

If you want to sense-check your structure or identify issues before they escalate, Property118 can help you prepare for discussions with your accountant or tax adviser.

This article is for general information only and is not legal, tax, or SDLT advice.

⚖️ Important notice – scope of planning support

Where our recommendations touch on areas requiring regulated input, we refer clients to appropriately authorised professionals for advice and execution.