South Africa Case Law

Promed Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (Customs and Excise) (D806/22)

Promed Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (Customs and Excise) (D806/22) [2023] ZAKZDHC 27 (26 May 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

D806/22

Judge

Chetty

The High Court dismissed an importer's bid to return seized goods to its supplier without paying customs duty, holding the Act gave no such discretion.

• Customs And Excise Act
• Tariff Classification
• Forfeiture Of Imported Goods
• Remission Of Penalties
• False Declaration
• Judicial Review

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Executor of the Estate late Lot Maduke Ndlovu (A395/2016)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Executor of the Estate late Lot Maduke Ndlovu (A395/2016) [2020] ZAGPPHC 601; 83 SATC 165 (12 October 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A395/2016

Judges

Pretorius, Tolmay, Maakane

The High Court held that the respondent was not entitled to raise the issue of section 89quat interest for the first time on appeal, as it was not part of the original objection or grounds of appeal. The Court found that remission of the 10% additional tax was not warranted, as SARS had already considered extenuating circumstances and reduced the penalty from 200% to 10%. The respondent, as a senior banking executive, was expected to exercise a higher degree of care and was responsible for declaring the gain from share options, regardless of reliance on employer or scheme administrator. The C…

Source excerpt

• Income Tax Assessment
• Additional Tax
• Interest On Underpayment
• Remission Of Penalties
• Tax Objection And Appeal

AB CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (759)

AB CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (759) [2013] ZATC 1; 75 SATC 303 (3 May 2013)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

759

Judge

C Pretorius

Taxpayer’s late challenge to a VAT assessment failed because the capital amount was not raised in the original objection or appeal.

• Value Added Tax
• Finality Of Assessment
• Grounds Of Objection
• Remission Of Penalties
• Value-added-tax
• Tax-objections

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Costa (14/1984)

Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Costa (14/1984) [1985] ZASCA 32; [1985] 2 All SA 335 (A) (24 May 1985)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

14/1984

Judges

Corbett, Joubert, Van Heerden, Galgut, Nicholas

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Special Court was correct in exercising its own discretion regarding the penalty imposed under section 76 of the Income Tax Act. The Special Court was entitled to consider extenuating circumstances and all relevant factors, including the respondent's means, when determining the quantum of the penalty. The appellate court found that the Special Court did not misdirect itself in law or principle and that the penalty imposed was not unreasonable. The approach of the Special Court was consistent with the legislative intent that the Special Court act as a…

Source excerpt

• Income Tax Penalties
• Remission Of Penalties
• Extenuating Circumstances
• Discretionary Powers
• Appeal Procedure