Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda) - 2019

Sort by:

3 judgments

Citation	Judgment date
March 2019
Eram Uganda v Uganda Revenue Authority (Taxation Application No. 59 of 2018) [2019] UGTAT 3 (29 March 2019) Section 15’s mandatory 30% deposit requirement is satisfied where the revenue authority has recovered that amount, so the objection is dismissed. Tax Appeals Tribunal Act s.15 – mandatory 30% deposit; recovery by respondent (set-off/offset) can satisfy the deposit requirement; preliminary objection for non-payment dismissed where recovery exceeds 30%; costs awarded.	29 March 2019
Mugenyi v Hoima District Administration (Taxation Appeal No. 35 of 2017) [2019] UGTAT 1 (1 March 2019) The applicant's challenge to the taxing officer's UGX 90,000,000 instruction fee failed absent any error of principle or manifestly inadequate award. * Taxation of costs – instruction fees – when a court may vary a taxing officer’s award – error of principle or manifestly excessive/low award required for interference. * Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules – Schedule 6 – consideration of ascertainable value and factors in assessing instruction fees. * Effect of consent/compromise on a decree – does not necessarily extinguish separate costs claims. * Finality of judgment – effect of pending/dismissed miscellaneous applications on subsequent taxation proceedings.	1 March 2019
February 2019
Eddie Kazzi v Uganda Revenue Authority (Taxation Application No. 3 of 2017) [2019] UGTAT 2 (13 February 2019) Application against customs seizure dismissed as time-barred and lacking locus; goods sold, origin undeterminable. Customs law – seizure and forfeiture of goods – EACCMA provisions on seizure, claim and condemnation – statutory time limits (S.214, S.216, S.229/S.230) – locus/ownership of seized goods – sale of perishable seized goods – Limitation Act inapplicable to statutory customs disputes.	13 February 2019