In C Candy v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 416 (TC) (10 April) the FTT decided that FA 2003 Sch 10 para 34 provides a remedy when no other relief is available and therefore permitted the taxpayer to claim relief for SDLT paid on a contract that was substantially performed but not completed despite relief under another provision FA 2003 s 44(9) being out of time since that provision required the relief to be claimed by amending the return.
The taxpayer had paid SDLT on the substantial performance of a contract but had subsequently sought repayment of that SDLT on the basis that the contract had not been completed. In such circumstances a repayment claim is normally made by amending the return under FA 2003 s 44(9). However as explained in Candy [2022] EWCA Civ 1447 the taxpayer was unable to claim repayment...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In C Candy v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 416 (TC) (10 April) the FTT decided that FA 2003 Sch 10 para 34 provides a remedy when no other relief is available and therefore permitted the taxpayer to claim relief for SDLT paid on a contract that was substantially performed but not completed despite relief under another provision FA 2003 s 44(9) being out of time since that provision required the relief to be claimed by amending the return.
The taxpayer had paid SDLT on the substantial performance of a contract but had subsequently sought repayment of that SDLT on the basis that the contract had not been completed. In such circumstances a repayment claim is normally made by amending the return under FA 2003 s 44(9). However as explained in Candy [2022] EWCA Civ 1447 the taxpayer was unable to claim repayment...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
