Was property mixed use or wholly residential?

The taxpayers bought a property with more than 3.5 acres of land. They paid stamp duty land tax on the basis that it was residential. Their agent later claimed a repayment saying the purchase had been misclassified as residential when it was mixed-use so a lower tax rate applied. The agent said the property included a barn which was classified as non-residential along with a meadow which was not necessary to the property and a bridleway which was open to the public.

HMRC refused the claim on the basis that the grounds were the land surrounding the house and were available as an amenity for the dwelling. The use or non-use to which they were put was irrelevant.

The First-tier Tribunal noted that the stamp duty land tax legislation did not define ‘garden or grounds’ so that their ordinary meaning should be used. Grounds was an ordinary word and its...