Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search
background image
profile image

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

The Tax Appeals Tribunal of Uganda (TAT) was established by an Act of Parliament in 1997. By enhancing this Act, parliament was fulfilling the requirement in Article 152 (3) of the Constitution 1995. Tax Appeals Tribunal opened its doors to the public in May 1999. The duty of Tax Appeals Tribunal of Uganda is to settle Tax Disputes between tax payers and the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA)

Physical address
NIC Building, 7/8th Floor
Visit website
https://www.tat.go.ug/
5 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
5 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 2021
Chestnut Uganda Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 94 of 2019) [2021] UGTAT 8 (31 March 2021)
Registered taxable person entitled to input VAT on construction costs used in its business; claim allowed with costs.
VAT – Input tax credit – Section 28(1) VAT Act – entitlement where supplies made to a taxable person during tax period and used in the business – making taxable supplies not a pre‑condition – construction costs for commercial property recoverable where used in taxable business (letting advertising space) – taxable person defined by registration.
 31 March 2021
Muhju Care v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 82 of 2019) [2021] UGTAT 17 (31 March 2021)
Donor grants are not taxable supplies; input VAT apportionment must exclude grants and the assessment was set aside.
VAT — Input tax apportionment (S.28(7)(b); Fourth Schedule S.1(f)): donor grants are not taxable supplies and must be excluded from C; dexa scan services are exempt medical supplies under item 1(h) of the Second Schedule; where B/C yields entitlement, input tax credit follows; VAT assessment based on including grants set aside.
 31 March 2021
Bondo Tea Estate Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 65 of 2018) [2021] UGTAT 6 (29 March 2021)
Tribunal held related‑party sales were arm’s‑length; respondent’s market‑price adjustment unlawful; assessed loss partly upheld.
Tax — transfer pricing and related‑party transactions — arm’s‑length principle v. fair market value; Tax Procedures Code s.23 powers to assess on best information; self‑assessment and assessed losses (s.20 Tax Procedures Code) — burden on taxpayer to prove loss; admissibility and reliability of field inspection evidence in tax reassessments.
 29 March 2021
ATC v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 17 of 2019) [2021] UGTAT 24 (23 March 2021)
Instruction fees and separate perusal fees disallowed where respondent used salaried in-house counsel and rules subsume perusals into instruction fees.
Advocates’ costs — Taxation of bill of costs — Instruction fees not allowable where in-house counsel used and no external instruction expense incurred — Perusals subsumed within instruction fee under sixth schedule — Fifth schedule inapplicable to justify separate perusal charge.
 23 March 2021
National Forestry Authority v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 4 of 2021) [2021] UGTAT 19 (18 March 2021)
Applicant’s delay due to a clerk’s omission is imputed to it; no sufficient cause shown, extension refused.
* Tax procedure – extension of time – S.16 Tax Appeals Tribunal Act and Rule 11 – requirement to show reasonable/sufficient cause. * Procedural law – employer vicarious responsibility – negligence of employee (legal clerk) imputed to institutional litigant; does not amount to sufficient cause. * Administrative law – estoppel – cannot be used to fetter a statutory body’s statutory powers. * Exercise of discretion – factors: length of delay, reason, prospects of success, prejudice to other party.
 18 March 2021