Fast (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (IT 14305) [2023] ZATC 13 (24 August 2023)
The court held that the Commissioner’s amendment to his rule 31 statement does not constitute a novation of the whole factual or legal basis of the assessment, as the primary ground remains unchanged and the alternative ground merely responds to contentions raised by FAST. The introduction of new evidence by Dr Emann is permissible as it does not alter the facts of the tested transaction but provides additional comparators. The prohibition in sub-rule 31(3) is not triggered because the amendment does not replace the original obligation. Regarding FAST’s application to amend its rule 32 statement, the court found that amendments connected to the original objection are permissible, but...
- Citation
- [2023] ZATC 13
- Parties
- Appellant: Fast (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
- Court
- Tax Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 24 August 2023
- Case Number
- IT 14305
- Procedural Posture
- Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend Rule 31 and Rule 32 Statements Prior to Appeal Hearing
- Outcome
- The Commissioner is granted leave to amend his rule 31 statement as proposed. FAST is granted leave to amend its rule 32 statement in respect of paragraphs 1,2,4,5 and 7, but refused leave for paragraphs 3 and 6. Each party is to pay its own costs.
- Judges
- Vally
- Legal Topics
- Transfer Pricing, Income Tax Act Section 31, Tax Court Rules Amendment, Arms Length Principle, Benchmarking Study, Procedural Fairness
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Fast (Pty) Ltd
Appellant
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend Rule 31 and Rule 32 Statements Prior to Appeal Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Commissioner may amend his rule 31 statement to introduce an alternative ground based on new evidence without novating the whole factual or legal basis of the assessment.
- 2 Whether FAST (Pty) Ltd may amend its rule 32 statement to introduce new grounds of appeal not raised in its original objection under rule 7.
- 3 How the interplay between Tax Court Rules 10(3), 10(4), 32(3), and 33(2) affects the ability of parties to amend their statements and introduce new grounds.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Commissioner’s amendment to his rule 31 statement does not constitute a novation of the whole factual or legal basis of the assessment, as the primary ground remains unchanged and the alternative ground merely responds to contentions raised by FAST. The introduction of new evidence by Dr Emann is permissible as it does not alter the facts of the tested transaction but provides additional comparators. The prohibition in sub-rule 31(3) is not triggered because the amendment does not replace the original obligation. Regarding FAST’s application to amend its rule 32 statement, the court found that amendments connected to the original objection are permissible, but...
Court Disposition
The Commissioner is granted leave to amend his rule 31 statement as proposed. FAST is granted leave to amend its rule 32 statement in respect of paragraphs 1,2,4,5 and 7, but refused leave for paragraphs 3 and 6. Each party is to pay its own costs.
Orders
- The respondent is granted leave to amend his rule 31 statement of grounds of assessment as per the proposed amendments served on 2 February 2023.
- Each party is to pay its own costs in respect of the Commissioner’s application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment