South Africa Case Law

Henque 3935 CC t/a PQ Clothing Outlet v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (846/2023)

Henque 3935 CC t/a PQ Clothing Outlet v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (846/2023) [2025] ZASCA 56 (12 May 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

846/2023

Judges

Zondi, Dambuza, Molefe, Koen, Dolamo

The SCA held that income tax and VAT liabilities arising before business rescue are pre-commencement claims and may not be set off against later VAT refunds.

• Business Rescue
• Income Tax Assessment
• Vat Liability
• Set Off
• Companies Act Section 154
• Tax Administration Act Section 105

JBSA Props (Pty) Ltd and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services and Others (5009/2023P)

JBSA Props (Pty) Ltd and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services and Others (5009/2023P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 3; 2025 (3) SA 510 (KZP) (10 January 2025)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

5009/2023P

Judge

Olsen

The court held that section 154(1) of the Companies Act requires a creditor to accede to the compromise of a post-commencement debt for it to be discharged under a business rescue plan. SARS did not accede to the compromise of its post-commencement VAT claim, either by overt act or written agreement, nor did it participate in the formulation or approval of the plan. The statutory process for compromising a tax debt under the Tax Administration Act was not followed. The absence of SARS from the creditors' meeting did not amount to acquiescence or consent. Accordingly, the business rescue plan…

Source excerpt

• Business Rescue
• Compromise Of Tax Debt
• Vat Liability
• Companies Act Section 152
• Companies Act Section 154
• Tax Administration Act Section 179

Taxpayer RPC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (VAT 1373 & 13862)

Taxpayer RPC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (VAT 1373 & 13862) [2023] ZATC 9 (3 July 2023)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

VAT 1373 & 13862

Judges

N.P. Mali, N Jiyane, T Mtombeni

The court found that SARS acted reasonably in issuing estimated assessments based on the limited information available, as the taxpayer failed to submit required returns and did not provide supporting documentation. The taxpayer's explanations regarding loan repayments were unsupported and contradicted by evidence, and his conduct demonstrated a plan to evade tax by disguising income and withholding information. The methodology used by SARS satisfied the objective test for reasonableness under the circumstances. The penalties imposed, including the 200% understatement penalty and the 20% late…

Source excerpt

• Estimated Assessment
• Understatement Penalty
• Vat Liability
• Capex Deduction
• Prescription Of Tax Debt
• Costs Award

Glencore International AG v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (34490/2021)

Glencore International AG v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (34490/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 951 (7 December 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

34490/2021

Judge

L.A. Retief

The High Court set aside SARS decisions finding Glencore’s goods diverted and imposing forfeiture, VAT, and penalties, holding the review irrational and unlawful.

• Customs And Excise Act
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Vat Liability
• Forfeiture Of Goods
• Procedural Fairness
• Review Of Administrative Action

South African Breweries (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service and Another (01740/21; 3889/21 and 7772/21)

South African Breweries (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service and Another (01740/21; 3889/21 and 7772/21) [2022] ZAGPPHC 695; 85 SATC 495 (13 September 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

01740/21; 3889/21 and 7772/21

Judge

N.P. Mali

The Pretoria High Court held that SAB remained liable for import duties and VAT on fraudulently cleared beer consignments and dismissed the review and declaratory applications.

• Customs And Excise Act
• Principal Agent Liability
• Administrative Action Review
• Import Duties
• Vat Liability
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act

Lennox Hamilton Price v Chantilly Trading 91 (Pty) Ltd ; Lennox Hamilton Price v Bowes Mcdougall Incorporated (5431/2017;713/2018)

Lennox Hamilton Price v Chantilly Trading 91 (Pty) Ltd ; Lennox Hamilton Price v Bowes Mcdougall Incorporated (5431/2017;713/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 20 (5 March 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

5431/2017;713/2018

Judge

Poswa-Lerotholi

The High Court granted consolidation of two related civil actions arising from a property sale and VAT dispute, finding that convenience outweighed any prejudice.

• Consolidation Of Actions
• Sale Of Immovable Property
• Vat Liability
• Professional Negligence
• Consolidation-of-actions
• Immovable-property-sale

Purlish Holdings (Proprietary) Limited v The Commisioner For The South African Revenue Service (76/2018)

Purlish Holdings (Proprietary) Limited v The Commisioner For The South African Revenue Service (76/2018) [2019] ZASCA 4; 81 SATC 204 (26 February 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

76/2018

Judges

Ponnan, Van der Merwe, Molemela

The SCA held that Purlish’s nil returns, omitted income and VAT non-registration justified understatement penalties, but the Tax Court could not increase them.

• Understatement Penalties
• Tax Administration Act
• Burden Of Proof
• Vat Liability
• Gross Negligence
• Understatement-penalties

ABC (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service (13251, VAT 1077)

ABC (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service (13251, VAT 1077) [2018] ZATC 13 (16 May 2018)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

13251, VAT 1077

Judges

Satchwell, Makume, Mali, Natasha Singh, Bongani Mathibela

The court found that SARS's concession of part of the quantum claimed was validly made before the hearing and that the taxpayer was not prejudiced or taken by surprise. SARS's methodology for estimating under-declared sales and gross profit margin, based on the REACT POS data and expert analysis, was found to be reasonable in the circumstances, especially given the taxpayer's failure to provide complete accounting records. The court rejected the taxpayer's challenges to the provenance and reliability of the data, noting that the taxpayer retained the originals and failed to demonstrate any di…

Source excerpt

• Income Tax Assessment
• Vat Liability
• Tax Penalties
• Burden Of Proof
• Administrative Review
• Tax Evasion

Dale v Aernoastic Properties Ltd (9297/2016)

Dale v Aernoastic Properties Ltd (9297/2016) [2016] ZAWCHC 160; 79 SATC 12 (25 October 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

9297/2016

Judge

Davis

The court found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient factual evidence to support a reasonable prospect of rescuing the first respondent or achieving a better return for creditors than liquidation. The valuation report relied upon was outdated, unsworn, and speculative, and no concrete evidence was presented to substantiate the claims of undervaluation or alternative asset realization. The tax dispute with SARS was settled and final, and the claim remained part of the financial distress calculation. The application for postponement was not formally made and was viewed as a further a…

Source excerpt

• Business Rescue
• Financial Distress
• Vat Liability
• Liquidation
• Creditor Preferences

Capital Acceptances (Pty) Ltd v Velakancane Trading CC and Others (160/2014)

Capital Acceptances (Pty) Ltd v Velakancane Trading CC and Others (160/2014) [2014] ZAGPJHC 105 (2 May 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

160/2014

Judge

FHD Van Oosten

The High Court granted attachment of a leased grader after rejecting defences based on justus error and alleged VAT overcharge.

• Lease Agreement
• Justus Error
• Vat Liability
• Attachment Of Property
• Lease-agreement
• Justus-error