Mohamed v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue

Mohamed brought an action against the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue, seeking a review of decisions to reverse a First Home Owner Grant and to re-assess him for mortgage and transfer duty with interest. The dispute arose from a transaction in which Mohamed purchased a unit in a block of units, which was treated as a residential complex for the purposes of the First Home Plus Scheme. The Commissioner had initially granted the grant and exempted Mohamed from stamp duty, but later reversed these decisions, finding that Mohamed had not satisfied the residency requirement for eligibility under the Scheme.

The central legal issues were whether Mohamed's purchase of the unit qualified as a home for the purposes of the First Home Plus Scheme, and whether he satisfied the residency requirement for eligibility for the grant and exemption from stamp duty. The court needed to determine if the property was a 'home' and if Mohamed's residency was sufficient under the Scheme's provisions.

The court found that the property was a 'home' for the purposes of the Scheme, as the property was a unit within a block of units treated as a residential complex. The court also held that Mohamed's residency was sufficient, as he had resided in the unit for at least six months prior to the purchase and intended to reside there for the next six years. The court concluded that the Commissioner's decisions to reverse the grant and re-assess Mohamed for duty were incorrect and that Mohamed was entitled to the grant and exemption. The Commissioner's appeal was dismissed, and the original decisions were reversed and revoked.