Can you send correspondence for review during an SDLT appeal if HMRC are responding slowly?

Introduction

People involved in a Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) appeal often want to know what they should do while waiting for HMRC to respond. A common concern is whether it is sensible to gather and send the correspondence and papers for review before HMRC has fully dealt with the case. This usually arises where there has already been some discussion with an adviser and the taxpayer wants a clearer view of the strength of the appeal.

This article explains that practical issue in general terms. It is based on an anonymised exchange about an ongoing SDLT appeal and focuses on the sensible next step: collecting and reviewing the correspondence and property papers so the position can be assessed properly.

The Question

A taxpayer involved in an SDLT appeal had already spoken to Nick about the matter. HMRC had been slow in responding. The taxpayer said they hoped to send the correspondence for review and wanted to move the matter forward while waiting for HMRC.

The underlying question is straightforward: where there is an ongoing SDLT dispute and HMRC is taking time to reply, is it useful to send the existing correspondence and documents for legal or technical review, and what should that review focus on?

Nick’s Explanation

Nick’s response was brief but clear. In substance, he confirmed that he looked forward to receiving the correspondence relating to the property for review. That indicates an important practical point in SDLT disputes: before anyone can give a meaningful view on the merits of an appeal, they need to see the actual documents.

In anonymised form, Nick’s position can be summarised like this:

“Please send the correspondence regarding the property, and I will review it.”

That may sound simple, but it reflects how SDLT appeals are usually assessed in practice. The answer often depends not on a short summary from the taxpayer, but on the exact wording of:

• HMRC’s decision letters and closure letters
• the original SDLT return and any amendment
• the purchase contract and transfer documents
• valuation or survey evidence
• photos, reports and invoices if the condition of the property is relevant
• any prior appeal or review correspondence

Without that material, it is difficult to judge whether HMRC has applied the law correctly or whether the appeal is likely to succeed.

The Law

SDLT is charged under the Finance Act 2003. The amount due depends on the nature of the transaction and whether any relief, exemption or special treatment applies. In disputed cases, the legal analysis commonly turns on the facts at the effective date of the transaction and on the correct interpretation of the statutory provisions.

If HMRC issues a decision with which the taxpayer disagrees, the taxpayer may in many cases:

• request a statutory review by HMRC, and/or
• appeal to the First-tier Tribunal, depending on the procedural stage

The exact route depends on the type of decision and the timing. The tribunal and HMRC will expect the taxpayer to identify:

• what decision is being challenged
• why it is said to be wrong in law or fact
• what documents support that position

In many SDLT disputes, the central issue is whether the property was residential, non-residential, mixed-use, or unsuitable for use as a dwelling on the effective date. Where “unsuitable for use” is argued, the legal threshold is now relatively high following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799.

That means a taxpayer cannot usually succeed simply by showing that a property needed repair, modernisation or substantial work. The condition must be serious enough, on the facts and evidence, to meet the legal test. Because of that, the documentary record matters greatly.

Analysis

Where HMRC is slow to respond, sending the correspondence and supporting papers for review is usually the right step. That is because the strength of an SDLT appeal is document-driven.

A proper review normally works in stages.

1. Identify the precise issue in dispute

   The first question is what HMRC is actually challenging or refusing. For example, is the dispute about mixed-use treatment, multiple dwellings relief, replacement of a main residence, or whether the property was suitable for use as a dwelling?

2. Check the procedural position

   The reviewer needs to see whether HMRC has issued an enquiry letter, closure notice, amendment, penalty decision, review conclusion or other formal decision. Deadlines matter. An appeal can fail procedurally if the next step is missed.

3. Match the facts to the legislation

   Once the issue is clear, the facts must be tested against the Finance Act 2003 and any relevant case law. That cannot be done safely from memory or from a short oral summary alone.

4. Test the evidence

   If the appeal depends on the condition of the property, the evidence should be checked closely. Survey reports, photographs, contractor quotations, invoices and completion-day condition can all matter. If the argument is that the property was not suitable for use as a dwelling, the evidence must be strong enough to meet the now demanding threshold after Mudan.

5. Review HMRC’s reasoning

   Sometimes HMRC has misunderstood the facts. Sometimes it has applied the wrong legal test. Sometimes the taxpayer’s own evidence is incomplete or framed in the wrong way. Reviewing the correspondence helps identify where the real dispute lies.

6. Decide the next practical step

   After review, the taxpayer can usually decide whether to provide further evidence to HMRC, pursue a review, lodge or continue an appeal, or reconsider the merits of the case.

So, although the original exchange was short, the practical significance is clear: if HMRC is moving slowly, use that time to assemble the papers. A careful review of the correspondence is often the foundation of a strong SDLT appeal.

Outcome

The practical conclusion is that, yes, it is sensible to send the correspondence and transaction documents for review during an SDLT appeal, especially where HMRC has been slow to respond. A meaningful opinion on the case usually depends on reading the actual papers rather than relying on a summary.

If the dispute involves whether a property was uninhabitable or unsuitable for use as a dwelling, readers should be aware that the legal threshold is now relatively high following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799. Evidence of disrepair alone may not be enough.

Practical Steps

If you are in a similar position, gather and organise the following:

• the SDLT return and any amended return
• HMRC letters, emails and decision notices
• the contract, transfer and completion statement
• survey reports, valuations and photographs
• builder reports, quotations and invoices if condition is relevant
• a simple timeline of events
• details of any statutory review or tribunal appeal already started

It also helps to prepare a short note explaining:

• what SDLT treatment was claimed
• why that treatment was said to apply
• what HMRC says is wrong
• what deadline is coming next

If the case concerns suitability for use as a dwelling, focus especially on evidence showing the property’s actual condition on the effective date of the transaction. Later works or later deterioration may carry less weight unless they clearly prove the condition at the relevant time.

Conclusion

When an SDLT appeal is already underway and HMRC is slow to respond, the best immediate step is usually to send the full correspondence and supporting papers for review. That allows the legal issue, the evidence and the next procedural step to be assessed properly. In condition-based cases, the standard for showing a property was unsuitable for use as a dwelling is now a demanding one after Mudan, so the quality of the evidence is critical.

Legal References Used

• Finance Act 2003
• Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799

This page was last updated on 22 March 2026.

See all questions and answers categorized in this sitemap. Or use Google site search below.