Judge Andre van Niekerk handed down an interesting judgment in the High Court of South Africa (North Gauteng Division) on 30 September 2013. In my respectful opinion the judgment is insightful and is correct. The facts are fairly simple. Miles Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd (MPH) had a tax liability of R37 441 090.59 to the commissioner of the South African Revenue Services (SARS). SARS had levied a tax assessment in this amount on MPH, which included penalties and interest. When MPH failed to pay the assessment, SARS brought a liquidation application against it, which was opposed on two grounds.
Category: Tax Administration
Single registration – Changes to tax & customs registration
What is Single Registration? The way you register for tax & customs and update your existing details has changed from 12 May 2014. SARS will now have a ‘Single Registration’ of a taxpayer across all taxes they pay and legal entities they’re associated with. From a taxpayer’s view, you will only have to register once as a new taxpayer and there-after add only the relevant details when you start paying e.g. VAT. It will also now be easier to update your existing details.
Litigation with SARS – levelling the playing field
New rules governing the procedures to be followed in respect of objections and appeals, which are now prescribed in terms of section 103 of the Tax Administration Act, were published in the Government Gazette on 11 July 2014. One of the frustrations experienced by taxpayers involved in litigation with SARS is the fact that SARS frequently fails to deliver documents or decisions within the time limits prescribed in the rules governing the conduct of disputes.
SARS must give proper reasons and have proper grounds
Author: Ben Strauss (DLA Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr) The Tax Administration Act, No 28 of 2011 (TAA), together with the new rules for dispute resolution promulgated under the TAA on 11 July 2014 (Rules), govern the resolution of disputes between taxpayers and the South African Revenue Service (SARS). Generally, and in terms of s104 of the TAA, a taxpayer who is aggrieved by an assessment may object to that assessment.
Can SARS just say “Prove it”?
By Ian Wilson An important element in disputes between taxpayers and SARS is the burden of proof. This deals with identifying which of the parties must prove its case in order to succeed. In section 102(1) of the Tax Administration Act the burden of proof that an amount is exempt or is not otherwise taxable, or that an amount is deductible, rests on the taxpayer.
Supreme Court considers administrative fairness in tax disputes
On June 12 2014 an interesting judgment was handed down in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Pretoria East Motors (Pty) Ltd (291/12) [2014] ZASCA 91. Facts The taxpayer operated a car dealership in Pretoria. The South African Revenue Service (SARS) conducted an audit of the taxpayer in respect of its 2000 to 2004 years of assessments, and raised various additional assessments in respect of income and value added tax (VAT), among other things. SARS also imposed punitive additional tax of 200%. The taxpayer objected to the additional assessments, but SARS disallowed the objection. The taxpayer appealed to the Tax Court.
SARS tax audits, the Tax Administration Act and making an effort to understand the taxpayer’s business operations
The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”) in the matter of SARS v Pretoria East Motors (Pty) Ltd (291/12) [2014] ZASCA 91 is important insofar as it deals with SARS’s obligations when conducting a tax audit. (The SCA judgment by Ponnan JA was delivered on 12 June 2014).
New tax dispute resolution rules – the wait is finally over
Authors: Nicole Paulsen and Gigi Nyanin (DLACliffeDekkerHofmeyr) On 11 July 2014, the new dispute resolution rules (new Rules) under s103 of the Tax Administration Act, No 28 of 2011 (TAA) were promulgated in Government Notice 550, published in Government Gazette No 37819.
SARS must not bully audited taxpayers
Authors: Andrew Wellsted and Rivalani Mutshinya (NortonRoseFulbright) A recent appeal case South African Revenue Service v Pretoria East Motors (Pty) Ltd, sets out the standard that SARS is expected to uphold when auditing taxpayers. SARS must try to understand the systems used by taxpayers before raising additional assessments and imposing penalties for incorrect tax treatment. The court criticised SARS for employing bullying tactics when dealing with taxpayers.
New binding private ruling on plant used in the production of renewable energy
SARS released BPR 172 on 25 June 2014. The ruling deals with the question of whether various items used in the production of solar energy qualify for the section 12B allowance. By way of background, section 12B(1)(h) read with section 12B(2) of the Income Tax Act allows a deduction on a 50:30:20 basis over three years of any ‘machinery, plant, implement, utensil or article owned by the taxpayer … and which was or is brought into use for the first time by that taxpayer for the purpose of his or her trade to be used by that taxpayer in the generation of electricity from: