South Africa Case Law

Lion Match Company (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner, South African Revenue Service (1047/2023; 1067/2023)

Lion Match Company (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner, South African Revenue Service (1047/2023; 1067/2023) [2025] ZASCA 112 (28 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1047/2023; 1067/2023

Judges

Mokgohloa, Meyer, Matojane, Keightley, Norman

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Lion Match failed to establish exceptional circumstances warranting reconsideration of the refusal of special leave to appeal. The application for postponement was not made timeously, and the explanation provided was vague and unsatisfactory. The withdrawal of legal representatives did not automatically justify a postponement, especially where the applicant failed to act promptly or provide adequate details. The Tax Court correctly refused the postponement and proceeded in the absence of the appellant, as permitted by rule 44(7) of the Tax Court Rules. Th…

Source excerpt

• Tax Administration Act
• Postponement Principles
• Capital Gains Tax
• Tax Court Rules
• Judicial Discretion
• Costs Orders

Kerbyn Cape 2 (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner: SARS (15899/2023)

Kerbyn Cape 2 (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner: SARS (15899/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 308 (11 July 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15899/2023

Judge

Mantame

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the review application because the applicant failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by the Tax Administration Act and PAJA. The applicant did not seek a directive from the High Court to bypass the Tax Court, nor did it demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying such a departure. The mere lapse of time and inaccessibility of internal remedies do not satisfy the duty to exhaust or constitute exceptional circumstances. The applicant's repeated late objections and failure to follow prescribed procedures under the TAA and Tax Court Rules pre…

Source excerpt

• Tax Administration Act
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Exhaustion Of Internal Remedies
• Condonation For Late Filing

Greyvensteyn v Commissioner for South African Revenue Service and Others (Application for Leave to Appeal) (B2495/2023)

Greyvensteyn v Commissioner for South African Revenue Service and Others (Application for Leave to Appeal) (B2495/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 707 (1 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

B2495/2023

Judge

Amien

The court found that SARS' actions under sections 180 and 184(2) of the Tax Administration Act are administrative in nature and subject to judicial review under PAJA, thus not infringing the applicant's section 34 constitutional right to access to court. The applicant's challenge was deemed an abuse of process, justifying the costs order against him. However, the court acknowledged that there is a reasonable prospect that another court could find SARS' actions to be adjudicative, potentially leading to a different conclusion regarding constitutional validity. Given the public importance of th…

Source excerpt

• Tax Administration Act
• Constitutional Validity
• Access To Court
• Costs In Constitutional Litigation
• Administrative Vs Adjudicative Action

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Virgin Mobile South Africa (Pty) Ltd (1303/2023)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Virgin Mobile South Africa (Pty) Ltd (1303/2023) [2025] ZASCA 77 (4 June 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1303/2023

Judges

Nicholls, Keightley, Musi, Windell, Molitsoane

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that SARS cured its default by complying with a Rule 56(1) notice, so the taxpayer’s default judgment application was irregular.

• Tax Administration Act
• Default Judgment
• Irregular Step
• Condonation
• Tax Court Rules
• Rule 56 Application

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services In Re Vendcorp 54 CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services and Another (Leave to Appeal) (14711/2023)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services In Re Vendcorp 54 CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services and Another (Leave to Appeal) (14711/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 343 (25 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

14711/2023

Judge

Ngalwana

The High Court granted leave to appeal on five tax-administration questions about CSARS investigations, authorisation, VDP notice, and substitution.

• Tax Administration Act
• Administrative Action Review
• Voluntary Disclosure Programme
• Notice Requirements
• Authorisation Of Investigations
• Substitution Order

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v ASPASA NPC and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2023-099811)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v ASPASA NPC and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2023-099811) [2025] ZAGPPHC 223 (5 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023-099811

Judge

Labuschagne

The High Court dismissed SARS’s application for leave to appeal, holding it had no reasonable prospects of success on the meaning of “bulk” in the royalty legislation.

• Tax Administration Act
• Mineral And Petroleum Resources Royalty Act
• Statutory Interpretation
• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Award
• Leave-to-appeal

Naude v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service and Another (51712/2017)

Naude v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service and Another (51712/2017) [2025] ZAGPPHC 152 (13 February 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

51712/2017

Judge

E Joyini

The High Court dismissed a challenge to SARS’s disallowance of diesel refund claims, finding the applicant had not met the statutory requirements and ordering costs against him.

• Diesel Refund Scheme
• Customs And Excise Act
• Vat Assessment
• Tax Administration Act
• Judicial Review Of Administrative Action
• Diesel-refund-scheme

Greyvensteyn and Other v Commissioner of South African Revenue Service and Others (B2495/2023)

Greyvensteyn and Other v Commissioner of South African Revenue Service and Others (B2495/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 128 (12 February 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

B2495/2023

Judge

Amien

The court finds that the process under sections 180 and 184(2) of the Tax Administration Act constitutes administrative action, not self-help, and is subject to judicial review under PAJA and the principle of legality. The applicant's right of access to court is not ousted, as he may challenge SARS' decision through substantive judicial review. The limitation imposed by section 186(3) on the applicant's rights to freedom of movement and trade is reasonable and justifiable under section 36 of the Constitution, given the need to secure tax collection and prevent dissipation of assets. Judicial…

Source excerpt

• Tax Administration Act
• Personal Liability For Tax Debt
• Judicial Review Of Administrative Action
• Limitation Of Constitutional Rights
• Preservation And Repatriation Orders
• Access To Court

Taxpayer S v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (IT 45931; VAT 22285)

Taxpayer S v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (IT 45931; VAT 22285) [2025] ZATC 2 (6 February 2025)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

IT 45931; VAT 22285

Judge

Mathenjwa

The Tax Court dismissed a bid to compel further SARS discovery, holding that discovery need not create or reformat documents and that redactions were lawful.

• Tax Administration Act
• Discovery Procedure
• Estimation Of Tax Assessment
• Section 46 Notices
• Tax-discovery
• Sars

Taxpayer Olive v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (2023/22)

Taxpayer Olive v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (2023/22) [2024] ZATC 20 (27 December 2024)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

2023/22

Judge

BAM

The Tax Court dismissed an application for default judgment, finding SARS had shown good cause for a delayed rule 13(1) ADR notice and awarding costs against the taxpayer.

• Tax Administration Act
• Alternative Dispute Resolution
• Default Judgment
• Condonation
• Employee Tax Incentive
• Test Case Procedure