Finance Act 2003, Schedule 10, paragraph 34A

Cases in which Commissioners not liable to give effect to a claim

SCHEDULE 10 Stamp duty land tax: returns, enquiries, assessments and appeals

34A (1) The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs are not liable to give effect to a claim under paragraph 34 if or to the extent that the claim falls within a case described in this paragraph.

(2) Case A is where the amount paid, or liable to be paid, is excessive by reason of—

(a) a mistake in a claim or election, or

(b) a mistake consisting of making or giving, or failing to make or give, a claim or election.

(3) Case B is where the claimant is or will be able to seek relief by taking other steps under this Part of this Act.

(4) Case C is where the claimant—

(a) could have sought relief by taking such steps within a period that has now expired, and

(b) knew, or ought reasonably to have known, before the end of that period that such relief was available.

(5) Case D is where the claim is made on grounds that—

(a) have been put to a court or tribunal in the course of an appeal by the claimant relating to the amount paid or liable to be paid, or

(b) have been put to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs in the course of an appeal by the claimant relating to that amount that is treated as having been determined by a tribunal (by virtue of paragraph 37 (settling of appeals by agreement)).

(6) Case E is where the claimant knew, or ought reasonably to have known, of the grounds for the claim before the latest of the following—

(a) the date on which an appeal by the claimant relating to the amount paid, or liable to be paid, in the course of which the ground could have been put forward (a “relevant appeal”) was determined by a court or tribunal (or is treated as having been so determined),

(b) the date on which the claimant withdrew a relevant appeal to a court or tribunal, and

(c) the end of the period in which the claimant was entitled to make a relevant appeal to a court or tribunal.

(7) Case F is where the amount in question was paid or is liable to be paid—

(a) in consequence of proceedings enforcing the payment of that amount brought against the claimant by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, or

(b) in accordance with an agreement between the claimant and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs settling such proceedings.

(8) Case G is where—

(a) the amount paid, or liable to be paid, is excessive by reason of a mistake in calculating the claimant's liability to tax, and

(b) liability was calculated in accordance with the practice generally prevailing at the time.

[F982 (9) Case G does not apply where the amount paid, or liable to be paid, is tax which has been charged contrary to EU law.

(10) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (9), an amount of tax is charged contrary to EU law if, in the circumstances in question, the charge to tax is contrary to—

(a) the provisions relating to the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital in Titles II and IV of Part 3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, or

(b) the provisions of any subsequent treaty replacing the provisions mentioned in paragraph (a).F982]

Definitions used in Schedule 10, paragraph 34A 1

the court

(2) For this purpose “the court” means—

(a) in relation to an order made by a circuit judge, the Crown Court;

(b) in relation to an order made by a sheriff, a sheriff court;

(c) in relation to an order made by a county court judge in Northern Ireland, a county court in Northern Ireland.

Defined in Sch.13 para.40(2) · see it in the full Act

Cases considering Schedule 10, paragraph 34A 6

Richard Warner v The Commissioners for HMRC

[2026] UKUT 284 (TCC) · 28 July 2026

A failure to claim relief may amount to a mistake within Case A and ordinarily cannot be remedied through overpayment relief. The cause of the failure may matter in some circumstances, but the facts here did not justify departing from that principle; the scheme provides no residual HMRC discretion where a Case applies. (see paras [58]-[66]) A finding that Case C bars relief requires supporting facts on whether the claimant knew or ought reasonably to have known that relief was available before the relevant period expired. The FTT had made no such findings, so its conditional conclusion was an error of law. (see paras [56]-[57], [70])

Commissioners for HMRC v Christian Peter Candy

[2026] UKUT 282 (TCC) · 27 July 2026Limits

Identifies Cases A to G as restrictions on overpayment relief. The Tribunal did not decide whether the exclusions applied to a claim based on a repayment right arising after the return amendment period. (see paras [39], [76]-[83]) Explains that Case A concerns excess tax caused by a mistake in a claim or a failure to claim. The Tribunal observed that it may not naturally apply where the repayment right arose only after the return amendment period, but left the question open. (see paras [60], [81], [83]) Uses Case B to identify the unavailability of overpayment relief where the claimant can obtain relief through other statutory steps. It supports the description of paragraph 34 as a remedy of last resort. (see paras [38]-[39]) Explains that Case C concerns a claimant who could have sought relief within a period that has expired and knew or ought to have known it was available. The Tribunal did not decide its application to a later-arising repayment right. (see paras [76]-[77], [81])

BTR Core Fund JPUT v The Commissioners for HMRC

[2026] UKUT 27 (TCC) · 21 January 2026Limits

Excludes overpayment relief where the claim falls within a case described in paragraph 34A. The provision establishes the structure within which Case A was construed (see para [21]). Excludes relief where the excessive amount was caused by a mistake in a claim or election. The Tribunal held that this requires a causal connection between the overpayment and a mistake in the claim itself; the connection was absent here (see paras [36], [51]-[56], [73]). Excludes relief where the mistake consists of making or failing to make a claim or election. The provision illustrates Case A’s focus on claims and elections rather than every calculation made in a return (see paras [21], [44]-[47]). Identifies the first condition for Case G, concerning an excessive amount caused by a mistake in calculating liability to tax. The Tribunal held that Case G was consistent with either party’s construction and did not determine Case A (see para [74](3)). Forms the second condition for Case G, requiring liability to have been calculated in accordance with prevailing practice. The Tribunal noted that Case G did not resolve the construction of Case A (see para [74](3)).

What each judgment says about Schedule 10, paragraph 34A is in the case-law panel in the full Act.

Amendments and notes

1 notes from legislation.gov.uk

Amendments

  1. F982Sch. 10 para. 34A(9)(10) inserted (with effect in accordance with s. 231(5) of the amending Act) by Finance Act 2013 (c. 29), s. 231(4)