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 [1990] ZASCA 163

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Malcomess Properties (Isando) (Pty) Ltd. (41/89)

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Malcomess Properties (Isando) (Pty) Ltd. (41/89) [1990] ZASCA 163; 1991 (2) SA 27 (AD); [1991] 4 All SA 145 (AD) (30 November 1990)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
41/89
Judges
Botha, Nestadt, Kumleben, Nicholas, Preiss

The court held that the profit realised from the sale of the Isando property by Malcomess (Isando) (Pty) Ltd was a capital realisation and not subject to income tax. The property was acquired and held as a capital asset, and its character was not altered by the subsequent sale, nor by the involvement of Malbak as the controlling shareholder. The sale was not part of a profit-making scheme but a mere realisation of a capital asset in the course of voluntary liquidation. The intention of Malbak in devising and executing the scheme was irrelevant to the intention of Malcomess (Isando), as the co…

Source excerpt

  • Capital Vs Revenue Distinction
  • Realisation Of Assets
  • Company Control
  • Scheme Of Arrangement
Read case analysis
Tax Law [1988] ZASCA 24

Werklike Aantreklike Beleggings (Edms) Bpk. v Kommissaris van Binnelandse Inkomste (24/88)

Werklike Aantreklike Beleggings (Edms) Bpk. v Kommissaris van Binnelandse Inkomste (24/88) [1988] ZASCA 24 (28 March 1988)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
24/88
Judges
Corbett, Hefer, Grosskopf, Nicholas, Boshoff

The court held that the appellant failed to discharge the burden of proof that the profit from the expropriation and sale of the property was of a capital nature. The evidence, including the timing of the acquisition, the actions taken to enhance the value of the property, and the subsequent sale at a substantial profit, indicated that the transaction formed part of a scheme for profit-making. The court found the testimony of de Bruin unreliable and uncorroborated, and the supporting affidavit from Bramley insufficient to overcome the strong inference of a profit-making intention. Accordingly…

Source excerpt

  • Income Vs Capital Gain
  • Burden Of Proof
  • Realisation Of Assets
  • Scheme For Profit Making
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.