Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Buthelezi and Others (B5917/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 467 (10 May 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
B5917/2023
Judge
Unterhalter
The High Court confirmed a SARS preservation order against the Setumishi respondents after finding the application was properly authorised and the tax-evasion evidence was not rebutted.
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Majestic Silver Trading 275 (Pty) Ltd and Others (B445/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1791 (11 October 2023)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
B445/2023
Judge
Davis
The court confirmed a tax preservation order against the trust and Mr Shabangu, discharged it against Mrs Shabangu, and authorized asset realization to secure tax debts.
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services v Khagiso Afrika Holdings (PTY) LTD and Others (49048/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 36 (16 January 2023)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
49048/2021
Judge
Nyathi
The court found that SARS had established the requirements for a final preservation order under section 163 of the Tax Administration Act. The evidence showed that SOA received substantial funds from Khagiso Afrika Holdings and failed to declare the corresponding output VAT, submitting a false VAT201 return. The pattern of immediate fund transfers among associated companies, including SOA, indicated a clear risk of asset dissipation. The court rejected the respondents' argument that SOA had no assets to preserve, noting that the systematic funneling of funds was designed to frustrate tax coll…
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services v Esibonga Investment (Pty) Ltd and Others (16177/21) [2022] ZAWCHC 144 (29 July 2022)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
16177/21
Judge
Thulare
The court found that SARS had established a reasonable basis for the preservation order under section 163 of the Tax Administration Act. The respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the funds paid by Esibonga on their behalf and did not rebut the money laundering allegations. The provisional order was limited to the specified property, Unit 13, Fourway Crest, as set out in Schedule A. The appointment of a curator bonis was necessary to secure the property and facilitate investigation into the transactions. The respondents' arguments that the order was excessive and without…
Sookoo and Others v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service and Another (49048/21) [2022] ZAGPPHC 285 (3 May 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
49048/21
Judge
E van der Schyff
The High Court partly granted urgent relief over a SARS preservation order, declaring On Track Mobile (Pty) Ltd’s asset preservation unlawful but leaving the other applicants’ challenge to the return day.
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Van Zyl and Others (37351/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 34 (27 January 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
37351/2020
Judge
N Davis
SARS secured confirmation of a tax preservation order tied to a fraudulent VAT refund scheme, with limits imposed for one respondent and a caveat condition for another.
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Raphela and Others (2091/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 191; 84 SATC 143 (29 March 2021)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
2091/2021
Judge
N Davis
The court found that the jurisdictional requirements for a preservation order under section 163 of the Tax Administration Act were met. The section empowers SARS to preserve assets held by persons other than the taxpayer, without requiring proof of collusion or intention to dissipate. The funds in Mrs Mdlulwa's accounts originated from the taxpayer and, if not preserved, would frustrate the collection of tax. The court rejected the argument that section 183 requirements applied, as SARS was not seeking to hold Mrs Mdlulwa jointly liable but to preserve assets. The alleged non-disclosures in t…
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Badenhorst t/a SA Global Trading and/or Global Trading and Others, Commissioner of the South African Revenue Service v Vermaak and Others (51232/2013, 56971/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1085 (13 October 2015)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
51232/2013, 56971/2013
Judge
C Pretorius
The court found that section 163 of the Tax Administration Act is clear and unambiguous in permitting preservation orders against 'any person' holding assets derived from tax fraud, not only taxpayers. SARS established a prima facie case that Mr Sassin and Trojin Feeds knowingly participated in a VAT fraud scheme, received R65 million from dissipated VAT repayments, and that preservation of their assets is necessary to secure collection of tax owed by Mr Badenhorst, who is insolvent. The court rejected the respondents' constitutional challenge, holding that the deprivation of property was not…
