South Africa Case Law

Taxpayer RPC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (VAT 1373 & 13862)

Taxpayer RPC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (VAT 1373 & 13862) [2023] ZATC 9 (3 July 2023)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

VAT 1373 & 13862

Judges

N.P. Mali, N Jiyane, T Mtombeni

The court found that SARS acted reasonably in issuing estimated assessments based on the limited information available, as the taxpayer failed to submit required returns and did not provide supporting documentation. The taxpayer's explanations regarding loan repayments were unsupported and contradicted by evidence, and his conduct demonstrated a plan to evade tax by disguising income and withholding information. The methodology used by SARS satisfied the objective test for reasonableness under the circumstances. The penalties imposed, including the 200% understatement penalty and the 20% late…

Source excerpt

• Estimated Assessment
• Understatement Penalty
• Vat Liability
• Capex Deduction
• Prescription Of Tax Debt
• Costs Award

Sepataka v Commissioner for South African Revenue Service (05/20445)

Sepataka v Commissioner for South African Revenue Service (05/20445) [2010] ZAGPJHC 79; 2011 (2) SA 556 (GSJ); 72 SATC 279 (31 August 2010)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

05/20445

Judge

B Spilg

The court set aside a tax judgment obtained under section 91(1)(b) while an objection to the assessment was still pending, holding the judgment was a nullity.

• Income Tax Act Section 91
• Estimated Assessment
• Pay Now Argue Later
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Income-tax-act-section-91
• Rescission-of-judgment