ABC (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the SA Revenue Service (0038/2015) [2016] ZATC 2; 78 SATC 225 (4 March 2016)

ABC (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the SA Revenue Service (0038/2015) [2016] ZATC 2; 78 SATC 225 (4 March 2016)

The court found that the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving exceptional circumstances as required by section 104 of the Tax Administration Act. None of the arguments advanced by the appellant were supported by factual evidence or documentation. The alleged complexity of the issues, the court recess, negotiations with SARS, dissatisfaction with the auditor, and time taken to obtain new professional advice were neither unusual nor causally connected to the delay. The court emphasized that the requirements of section 104 are peremptory and that the taxpayer should have sought appropriate tax advice promptly after the assessments were levied. The lapse of time from December...

Citation
[2016] ZATC 2
Parties
Appellant: ABC (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner for the SA Revenue Service
Court
Tax Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 March 2016
Case Number
0038/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Extend Objection Period
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Satchwell
Legal Topics
Tax Administration Act, Late Objection, Exceptional Circumstances, Onus of Proof
Tax Law Civil Procedure Tax Administration Act Late Objection Exceptional Circumstances Onus of Proof

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABC (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Commissioner for the SA Revenue Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Extend Objection Period

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the taxpayer discharged the onus to prove exceptional circumstances for the late lodging of an objection under section 104 of the Tax Administration Act.
  2. 2 Whether any of the arguments advanced by the taxpayer constitute exceptional circumstances causally connected to the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the prospects of success of the objection are relevant to the extension of the objection period.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving exceptional circumstances as required by section 104 of the Tax Administration Act. None of the arguments advanced by the appellant were supported by factual evidence or documentation. The alleged complexity of the issues, the court recess, negotiations with SARS, dissatisfaction with the auditor, and time taken to obtain new professional advice were neither unusual nor causally connected to the delay. The court emphasized that the requirements of section 104 are peremptory and that the taxpayer should have sought appropriate tax advice promptly after the assessments were levied. The lapse of time from December...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.