South Africa Case Law

Rennies Travel (Pty) Ltd v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (VAT/1715)

Rennies Travel (Pty) Ltd v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (VAT/1715) [2020] ZATC 23 (11 December 2020)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

VAT/1715

Judges

Twala, Xaba, Nhleko

The Tax Court held that airline incentive commissions paid to a travel agent for meeting sales targets were taxable at the standard VAT rate, not zero-rated.

• Value Added Tax
• Zero Rating
• Interpretation Of Contracts
• Supply Of Services
• Marketing And Promotion
• Additional Tax Assessment

ABC (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service (VAT 1558)

ABC (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service (VAT 1558) [2018] ZATC 7 (5 December 2018)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

VAT 1558

Judge

K M Savage

Tax Court held that promotional goods distributed as part of an advertising service could be separated under VAT s 8(15) and taxed at the standard rate.

• Value Added Tax
• Zero Rating
• Composite Supply
• Deeming Provision
• Supply Of Goods
• Supply Of Services

XO Africa Safaris v CSARS (395/15)

XO Africa Safaris v CSARS (395/15) [2016] ZASCA 160; 79 SATC 1 (3 October 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

395/15

Judges

Navsa, Wallis, Saldulker, Mathopo, Dlodlo

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that XO Africa Safaris’ tour-package services were taxable at the standard VAT rate, not zero-rated under section 11(2)(l).

• Value Added Tax
• Zero Rating
• Supply Of Services
• Statutory Interpretation
• Value-added-tax
• Zero-rating

D v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (VAT1390)

D v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (VAT1390) [2016] ZATC 9; 79 SATC 105 (14 June 2016)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

VAT1390

Judges

Binns-Ward, P. Surtees, K. Hofmeyr

The Tax Court held that a fast-food delivery company was liable for VAT on delivery charges collected from customers as part of its taxable consideration.

• Value Added Tax
• Supply Of Services
• Agency Vs Principal
• Consideration
• Output Tax Liability
• Value-added-tax

Respublica v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (864/2014)

Respublica v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (864/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 155; 78 SATC 368 (29 February 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

864/2014

Judge

Semenya

The court found that the lease agreement between Respublica and TUT was for the purpose of accommodating students, who are the end users and lodgers in terms of the Act. The students occupy the premises temporarily, and the agreement includes domestic goods and services as part of the all-inclusive charge. The restrictive interpretation advanced by SARS was rejected, as it ignored the commercial reality and purpose of the arrangement. The court held that the supply constituted commercial accommodation for VAT purposes, and Respublica is liable to account for VAT on only 60% of the rental inco…

Source excerpt

• Value Added Tax
• Commercial Accommodation
• Statutory Interpretation
• Supply Of Services

Stellenbosch Farmers' Winery Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service, Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Stellenbosch Farmers' Winery Ltd (511/2011, 504/2011)

Stellenbosch Farmers' Winery Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service, Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Stellenbosch Farmers' Winery Ltd (511/2011, 504/2011) [2012] ZASCA 72; 2012 (5) SA 363 (SCA); 74 SATC 235 (25 May 2012)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

511/2011, 504/2011

Judges

Brand, Van Heerden, Tshiqi, Kroon, Boruchowitz

The court held that R67 million paid for early termination of exclusive distribution rights was capital, not revenue, and upheld zero-rated VAT treatment.

• Income Tax
• Capital Vs Revenue Receipt
• Value Added Tax
• Supply Of Services
• Onus Of Proof
• Compensation For Loss Of Rights

South African Rugby Football Union v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (90/98)

South African Rugby Football Union v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (90/98) [1999] ZASCA 80; [1999] 4 All SA 444 (A); 2000 (1) SA 279 (SCA) (1 October 1999)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

90/98

Judges

Hefer, Grosskopf, Zulman, Melunsky, Farlam

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that SARFU’s overseas Rugby World Cup ticket supply was not zero-rated under VAT export rules, but the VAT had to be reassessed.

• Value Added Tax
• Zero Rating
• Supply Of Services
• Export Of Goods
• Value-added-tax
• Zero-rating