Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Danwet 202 (Pty) Ltd (399/2017) [2018] ZASCA 38; 2019 (5) SA 63 (SCA); 81 SATC 91 (28 March 2018)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Danwet 202 (Pty) Ltd (399/2017) [2018] ZASCA 38; 2019 (5) SA 63 (SCA); 81 SATC 91 (28 March 2018)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Tax Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the respondent's application for condonation because the respondent failed to lodge an objection against SARS's refusal to extend the appeal period, as required by section 104(3) of the Tax Administration Act. The statutory...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] ZASCA 38
Parties
Appellant: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service; Respondent: Danwet 202 (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 March 2018
Case Number
399/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Tax Court, Johannesburg
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Tax Court order set aside; matter struck from the roll.
Judges
Lewis, Majiedt, Mbha, Davis, Mothle
Legal Topics
Tax Administration Act, Jurisdiction of Tax Court, Condonation for Late Filing, Objection Procedure, Appeal Period Extension
Tax Law Civil Procedure Tax Administration Act Jurisdiction of Tax Court Condonation for Late Filing Objection Procedure Appeal Period Extension

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service

Appellant

Danwet 202 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Tax Court, Johannesburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tax Court had jurisdiction to grant condonation for the late filing of an appeal against an assessment.
  2. 2 Whether SARS has discretion to extend the period for lodging an appeal beyond the statutory limits under section 107 of the Tax Administration Act.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was obliged to object to SARS's refusal to extend the appeal period under section 104(3) of the Tax Administration Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Tax Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the respondent's application for condonation because the respondent failed to lodge an objection against SARS's refusal to extend the appeal period, as required by section 104(3) of the Tax Administration Act. The statutory scheme mandates that a taxpayer must object to such a decision before approaching the Tax Court. Since no valid objection was lodged, there was no valid application before the Tax Court, and its order granting condonation was invalid. The appeal was upheld, and the matter was struck from the roll.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Tax Court order set aside; matter struck from the roll.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
  • The order of the Tax Court is set aside and replaced with: 'The matter is struck from the roll.'