Ackermans Limited v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (16408/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 684 (23 September 2015)

Ackermans Limited v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (16408/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 684 (23 September 2015)

The court held that the determination of whether the delay in issuing Additional Assessments was reasonable must be considered within the framework of section 79 of the Income Tax Act, not solely under constitutional provisions. The Tax Court is the appropriate forum to resolve the complex factual disputes and apply the relevant statutory provisions. The order in the main judgment was procedural, not substantive, and did not decide the merits of the dispute. There are no reasonable prospects that another court would find that the delay should be assessed exclusively under section 237 of the Constitution. Consequently, leave to appeal is refused, and costs are awarded to the respondent.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 684
Parties
Applicant: Ackermans Limited; Respondent: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 September 2015
Case Number
16408/2013
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Main Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused. Costs awarded to the respondent.
Judges
S P Mothle
Legal Topics
Additional Assessments, Review of Administrative Action, Constitutional Obligations, Costs Orders
Tax Law Civil Procedure Additional Assessments Review of Administrative Action Constitutional Obligations Costs Orders

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ackermans Limited

Applicant

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Main Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted regarding the refusal to review and set aside SARS's decision to issue Additional Assessments.
  2. 2 Whether the reasonableness of SARS's delay in issuing Additional Assessments should be determined solely under constitutional provisions or also under the Income Tax Act.
  3. 3 Whether the Tax Court is the appropriate forum to resolve disputes of fact and complex tax issues arising from the Additional Assessments.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the determination of whether the delay in issuing Additional Assessments was reasonable must be considered within the framework of section 79 of the Income Tax Act, not solely under constitutional provisions. The Tax Court is the appropriate forum to resolve the complex factual disputes and apply the relevant statutory provisions. The order in the main judgment was procedural, not substantive, and did not decide the merits of the dispute. There are no reasonable prospects that another court would find that the delay should be assessed exclusively under section 237 of the Constitution. Consequently, leave to appeal is refused, and costs are awarded to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused. Costs awarded to the respondent.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is refused.
  • The Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent, including the costs of Respondent's counsel.