Marshall and Others v Commission for the South Africa Revenue Service (CCT208/17)
Marshall and Others v Commission for the South Africa Revenue Service (CCT208/17) [2018] ZACC 11; 2018 (7) BCLR 830 (CC); 2019 (6) SA 246 (CC); 80 SATC 400 (25 April 2018)
The Constitutional Court held that while evidence of consistent administrative interpretation may be relevant in marginal cases, it should not override the court’s duty to independently and objectively interpret legislation in accordance with constitutional principles. The Supreme Court of Appeal correctly interpreted the relevant sections of the Value Added Tax Act, finding that the Trust is liable for VAT on actual services supplied to provincial departments, and that subsidies received as a welfare organisation are subject to zero rating. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed d…
Source excerpt
- Value Added Tax Act
- Statutory Interpretation
- Judicial Deference
- Contra Fiscum Rule
- Fair Hearing Rights