[2025] KETAT 252 (KLR)

[2025] KETAT 252 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the applicant's delay of approximately four months in filing the Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Appeal was not inordinate and was reasonably explained by the applicant's lack of familiarity with the applicable procedures and being misguided. The Tribunal exercised its discretionary power to extend time, noting that the respondent did not oppose the application and would not suffer prejudice if the extension was granted. The Tribunal emphasized that the applicant should not be denied the opportunity to appeal due to procedural missteps, especially where the delay was not due to indolence and the applicant acted promptly upon discovering the correct procedure....

Citation
[2025] KETAT 252 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Glosec Solutions Limited; Respondent: Commissioner Legal Services and Board Coordination
Court
Tax Appeal Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
27 June 2025
Case Number
Tribunal Case Miscellaneous E037 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
CA Muga, AK Kiprotich, T Vikiru
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Late Filing of Appeal, Agency Notices, Tax Assessment Objection, Procedural Discretion
Source Language
English
Tax Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Late Filing of Appeal Agency Notices Tax Assessment Objection Procedural Discretion

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glosec Solutions Limited

Applicant

Commissioner Legal Services and Board Coordination

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to extend time for filing the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice if the extension is granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant's delay of approximately four months in filing the Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Appeal was not inordinate and was reasonably explained by the applicant's lack of familiarity with the applicable procedures and being misguided. The Tribunal exercised its discretionary power to extend time, noting that the respondent did not oppose the application and would not suffer prejudice if the extension was granted. The Tribunal emphasized that the applicant should not be denied the opportunity to appeal due to procedural missteps, especially where the delay was not due to indolence and the applicant acted promptly upon discovering the correct procedure....

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to file its Notice of Appeal, Memorandum of Appeal, and Statement of Facts out of time.
  • The applicant’s Notice of Appeal dated 22nd May 2025 and filed with this application is deemed to have been duly filed and served.