What happens if an HMRC review conclusion was not received and the tax appeal deadline may be late?

Introduction

Readers often search for this issue when HMRC says an independent review has already been completed, but the taxpayer or adviser has not actually received the review conclusion. That creates an immediate practical problem: the time limit for appealing to the First-tier Tribunal may already be running, or may even have expired, before the taxpayer has had a fair chance to decide what to do next.

This article explains the position in general terms. It covers what an HMRC review conclusion means, how tribunal appeal time limits usually work, and what may happen if the document was sent to an old address or otherwise not received.

The Question

A taxpayer challenged an HMRC decision and the matter went through HMRC’s internal review process. HMRC later asked whether an appeal to the tribunal had been notified. The adviser replied that the review conclusion had not been received and believed it may have been sent to an old correspondence address. HMRC then sent an electronic copy. The taxpayer needed time to consider whether to accept HMRC’s decision or appeal to the First-tier Tribunal, but there was concern that any appeal might now be out of time.

Nick’s Explanation

Nick’s core point was practical rather than argumentative. In anonymised form, his position was:

“We had not received the independent review conclusion. It may have gone to a previous address. Once we receive and review the document, we can advise on whether to notify an appeal to the tribunal.”

He later explained that the client needed a little more time to decide whether to accept HMRC’s determination or proceed to the tribunal.

HMRC’s response was also important. In substance, HMRC accepted that extra time on their side was not the real issue, because if a tribunal appeal was late, the decision on whether to admit it would be for the tribunal, not HMRC. HMRC also indicated that the period during which the adviser could not contact the taxpayer might be something the tribunal would take into account.

That is the key procedural point. Once the review conclusion has been issued, the next formal step is usually an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal. If that appeal is late, the tribunal has a discretion to allow it, but there is no automatic right to an extension merely because HMRC is willing to wait.

The Law

The relevant framework for appeals against HMRC decisions is found in the Finance Act 2003 for Stamp Duty Land Tax matters, together with the tribunal procedure rules and the general tax appeal provisions that govern HMRC review and appeal rights.

In broad terms:

• HMRC makes a decision, amendment, closure decision, assessment, or refusal.
• The taxpayer may ask HMRC for a statutory review, if available.
• Once the review is concluded, the taxpayer normally has a limited period to notify an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal.
• If that period has expired, the taxpayer can ask the tribunal to admit a late appeal.

Applications for late appeals are not decided by HMRC. They are decided by the tribunal, which considers all the circumstances. The tribunal will usually look at matters such as:

• the length of the delay
• the reason for the delay
• whether the taxpayer acted promptly once aware of the position
• the prejudice to each side
• the importance of finality in litigation
• the overall interests of justice

In tax procedure, the tribunal commonly applies the approach from Denton v TH White Ltd and related authorities when considering relief from sanctions and late procedural steps, although the exact context matters.

Analysis

The position can be analysed in stages.

First, identify the document that triggers the appeal deadline. In a review case, that is normally the HMRC review conclusion notice. If HMRC says it was issued on a particular date, the tribunal will usually start by treating that as the operative date unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Second, consider whether the notice was validly given. If it was sent to an outdated address despite HMRC having been notified of a new correspondence address, that may be relevant. If, however, HMRC used the address last provided in the claim or appeal paperwork, the tribunal may conclude that service was still effective. The exact facts matter.

Third, look at what happened once the taxpayer or adviser became aware of the review conclusion. This is often critical. If the adviser quickly asked for a copy, reviewed it, and then took steps to decide whether to appeal, that tends to support an application for permission to bring a late appeal. Delay after actual knowledge is much harder to explain.

Fourth, separate HMRC’s administrative patience from the tribunal’s legal discretion. Even if the HMRC officer says they are content to “bear with” the taxpayer for a few more days, that does not extend the statutory tribunal deadline. Only the tribunal can allow a late appeal once the time limit has expired.

Fifth, prepare the explanation for lateness carefully. In a case like this, the potentially relevant reasons may include:

• the review conclusion was not received at the time it was issued
• it may have been sent to an old address
• the adviser requested a copy promptly once HMRC referred to it
• the taxpayer needed a short period to consider the decision after finally receiving it
• there was difficulty contacting the taxpayer for a period

None of those points guarantees success, but they are the kinds of matters a tribunal may consider when deciding whether to admit a late appeal.

Sixth, if the underlying dispute concerns SDLT relief for a dwelling said to be uninhabitable or unsuitable for use as a dwelling, the substantive merits should be assessed realistically before pursuing litigation. The threshold is now relatively high following Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799. A property will not qualify merely because it needs repair, modernisation, or substantial works. The question is whether, at the effective date of transaction, the condition was so serious that it was not suitable for use as a dwelling. That is now a demanding test.

Outcome

The practical conclusion is that failure to receive the HMRC review conclusion does not automatically preserve the appeal deadline, but it can provide a basis for asking the First-tier Tribunal to admit a late appeal.

If the review conclusion was only received later, and the taxpayer acted reasonably promptly after that, there may be a credible application for permission to appeal out of time. However, the decision belongs to the tribunal, not HMRC.

If the underlying merits are weak, especially in an uninhabitable-property SDLT case after Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799, the taxpayer should think carefully before proceeding.

Practical Steps

• Obtain and keep a copy of the HMRC review conclusion.
• Confirm the date HMRC says it was issued and the address to which it was sent.
• Gather evidence showing when the taxpayer or adviser first actually received it.
• Check the tribunal deadline immediately.
• If time has expired, prepare a late appeal application without delay.
• Explain clearly why the notice was not received and what steps were taken once the problem came to light.
• Include any evidence of address changes, returned post, or prompt follow-up correspondence.
• Assess the substantive merits of the appeal before issuing, particularly if the case turns on whether a property was unsuitable for use as a dwelling.
• If the case concerns habitability, compare the property facts carefully against the stricter approach confirmed in Amarjeet and Tajinder Mudan v The Commissioners for HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 799.

Conclusion

If an HMRC review conclusion was not received, the taxpayer may still be able to pursue a tribunal appeal, but should act quickly. The key issue is not whether HMRC is content to wait, but whether the First-tier Tribunal will allow a late appeal in the interests of justice. Prompt action, a clear explanation, and a realistic assessment of the underlying merits are all essential.

Legal References Used

• Finance Act 2003
• First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) procedural rules
• Denton v TH White Ltd
• 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.