Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Tax Law [1999] ZASCA 59

Ticktin Timbers CC v Commissioner for Inland Revenue (443/97)

Ticktin Timbers CC v Commissioner for Inland Revenue (443/97) [1999] ZASCA 59; [1999] 4 All SA 192 (A) (10 September 1999)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
443/97
Judges
Hefer, Grosskopf, Marais, Zulman, Madlanga

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the interest paid by the close corporation to its sole member was not incurred in the production of the corporation's income but rather to facilitate a distribution to the member. The court found that the loan and the distribution were interdependent transactions, structured to enable the member to pay personal debts. The liability for interest was not necessary for the corporation's income-producing activities, and the deduction was therefore prohibited by section 23(g) of the Income Tax Act. The court distinguished between loans genuinely required for b…

Source excerpt

  • Income Tax Deduction
  • Interest On Loans
  • Close Corporation Distribution
  • Dual Purpose Expenditure
Read case analysis
Tax Law [1996] ZASCA 102

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Sunnyside Centre (Pty) Ltd. (86/95)

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Sunnyside Centre (Pty) Ltd. (86/95) [1996] ZASCA 102; 1997 (1) SA 68 (SCA); (20 September 1996)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
86/95
Judges
Van Heerden, Kumleben, Howie, Schutz, Scott

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the interest paid by Sunnyside Centre (Pty) Ltd to UBS in excess of interest received from SGH was not deductible under section 11(a) and section 23(g) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962. The Court found that the arrangement was primarily intended to benefit Agros (Pty) Ltd, another group company, by securing cheaper finance, and not to further Sunnyside's own trade or profitability. There was no evidence that Sunnyside intended to earn a profit from the transaction, nor that the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purposes of its trade.…

Source excerpt

  • Deductibility Of Interest
  • Income Tax Act 58 Of 1962
  • Dual Purpose Expenditure
  • Commercial Expediency
Read case analysis
Tax Law [1987] ZASCA 44

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Pick 'n Pay Wholesalers (Pty) Ltd (44/87)

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Pick 'n Pay Wholesalers (Pty) Ltd (44/87) [1987] ZASCA 44; [1987] 4 All SA 432 (AD) (14 May 1987)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
44/87
Judges
Corbett, Botha, Hefer, Nestadt, Nicholas

The court found that Pick 'n Pay did not discharge the onus of proving that the donation to the Urban Foundation was made solely for the purposes of trade. The evidence indicated that the donation was motivated by both a desire to obtain publicity and a genuine philanthropic purpose. The directors' own statements and the circumstances surrounding the donation, including its presentation at a press conference and the involvement of Mr Ackerman in both the donor and donee organisations, supported the conclusion that the expenditure was not exclusively for business purposes. As a result, section…

Source excerpt

  • Deductibility Of Expenditure
  • Dual Purpose Expenditure
  • Income Tax Act Section 11
  • Income Tax Act Section 23g
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.