South Africa Case Law

Samsung Electronics SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South Africa Revenue Service (2018/68900)

Samsung Electronics SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South Africa Revenue Service (2018/68900) [2021] ZAGPPHC 130; 83 SATC 304 (18 March 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2018/68900

Judge

MNGQIBISA-THUSI

The court held that the decisive criterion for customs classification is the objective characteristics and properties of the goods at the time of presentation for customs clearance. The Samsung Galaxy S7 is designed to be carried in the hand, has telephony features such as a speaker, microphone, SIM card slot, and keypad, and is manufactured as a cellular network handset. The fact that it performs additional functions does not detract from its principal function as a telephone for cellular networks. The applicant's reliance on post-usage and market surveys was found to be misplaced, as classi…

Source excerpt

• Customs Tariff Classification
• Interpretation Of Tariff Headings
• Principal Function Test
• General Interpretative Rules
• Appeal Against Tariff Determination

HMT Projects (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner South African Revenue Service (7215/2018)

HMT Projects (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner South African Revenue Service (7215/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 143 (14 April 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

7215/2018

Judge

Davis

The court dismissed a tariff appeal, holding that seamless carbon steel pipes certified to API 5L were line pipes classifiable under tariff heading 7304.19.

• Customs And Excise
• Tariff Classification
• Objective Characteristics
• Dual Certification
• Interpretation Of Tariff Headings
• Customs-and-excise

International Business Machines South Africa (Pty) Ltd. v Commisioner for Customs and Excise (468/83)

International Business Machines South Africa (Pty) Ltd. v Commisioner for Customs and Excise (468/83) [1985] ZASCA 87; [1985] 2 All SA 596 (A) (19 September 1985)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

468/83

Judges

Kotzé, Miller, Botha, Galgut, Nicholas

The court held that the IBM 3624 ATM was classifiable under tariff heading 84.53.10 as part of an automatic data processing system, not as an office machine.

• Customs Tariff Classification
• Interpretation Of Tariff Headings
• Automatic Data Processing Machines
• Office Machines
• Refund Of Customs Duty
• Customs-tariff-classification