[2024] KETAT 622 (KLR)

[2024] KETAT 622 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the Appellant's delay in filing the appeal was excusable as she was not properly served or notified of the objection decision by the Respondent. The Respondent failed to provide evidence of service or notification, such as the Appellant's email address or proof of delivery. The Tribunal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KETAT 622 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jane Mary Muthoni Gichengo; Respondent: Commissioner of Investigations And Enforcement
Court
Tax Appeal Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Appeal E026 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
E.N Wafula, M Makau, EN Njeru, E Ng'ang'a, AK Kiprotich
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Service of Decision, Appeal Out of Time, Leave of Tribunal
Source Language
en
Tax Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Service of Decision Appeal Out of Time Leave of Tribunal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Mary Muthoni Gichengo

Appellant

Commissioner of Investigations And Enforcement

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant has demonstrated reasonable grounds to warrant extension of time to file the appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant was properly served or notified of the objection decision by the Respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in filing the appeal was inordinate or excusable.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Appellant's delay in filing the appeal was excusable as she was not properly served or notified of the objection decision by the Respondent. The Respondent failed to provide evidence of service or notification, such as the Appellant's email address or proof of delivery. The Tribunal accepted that the Appellant acted promptly upon learning of the decision and that her application for extension of time was brought without undue delay. The Tribunal further held that the Respondent did not demonstrate any prejudice that would result from granting the extension. Accordingly, the Tribunal exercised its discretion under Section 13(3) and (4) of the Tax Appeals...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The Appellant is granted leave to file the appeal out of time.
  • The Notice of Appeal, Memorandum of Appeal, and Statement of Facts dated 1st February 2023 and filed on 2nd February 2023 are deemed properly filed and served.