Uganda Case Law

Kasese Cobalt Company Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 21 of 2020)

Kasese Cobalt Company Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 21 of 2020) [2021] UGTAT 25 (27 May 2021)

Court

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

Case number

Application 21 of 2020

Judges

Mugenyi, Chairperson, Akabway, Panel Member, Mugerwa

The Tribunal held that agency notices issued by the respondent after the Tribunal's ruling were lawful and in accordance with the Tax Procedure Code Act, which provides a specific mechanism for tax recovery that overrides general civil procedure rules. The Tribunal found that it had jurisdiction to review the issuance of agency notices as a new dispute arose regarding their implementation. However, the applicant failed to demonstrate that the respondent's actions were unlawful or that the delay in service of the agency notice caused any detriment, particularly as there was no evidence that in…

Source excerpt

• Agency Notices
• Tax Enforcement
• Jurisdiction Of Tribunal
• Service Of Process
• Interim Orders

East Africa Cranes Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 51 of 2018)

East Africa Cranes Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 51 of 2018) [2021] UGTAT 9 (21 January 2021)

Court

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

Case number

Application No. TAT 51 of 2018

Judges

Akabway, Panel Member, Mugenyi, Chairperson, Ali

The Tribunal found that the applicant was entitled to a refund of Shs. 275,908,480 for the period 2011 to 2013, as this amount was clearly supported by the agreed facts and not time-barred. The Tribunal rejected the respondent's argument that an audit could be indefinitely delayed, holding that audits must be conducted within a reasonable period. Regarding the nonrefundable overpaid tax for 2008 to 2010, the Tribunal held that while statutory time limits bar refund applications, there is no express provision barring the use of excess tax to offset current or future liabilities. The Tribunal r…

Source excerpt

• Tax Refunds
• Withholding Tax
• Statutory Time Limits
• Tax Offset
• Agency Notices

Ecobank Uganda Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority

Ecobank Uganda Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 1 of 2019) [2020] UGTAT 1 (10 March 2020)

Court

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 1 of 2019

Judges

Akabway, Panel Member, Mugerwa, Mugenyi, Chairperson

The Tribunal held that the application for extension of time to file a review of the respondent's objection decision was filed more than one year after the taxation decision, far outside the six-month statutory period prescribed by Section 16(7) of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act. The Tribunal found that it has no discretion to extend time beyond this statutory limit, regardless of the applicant's reasons for delay, including parallel proceedings in the High Court. The Tribunal emphasized that statutory timelines are matters of substantive law, not mere technicalities, and must be strictly compl…

Source excerpt

• Tax Appeals Tribunal Procedure
• Extension Of Time
• Objection Decisions
• Agency Notices
• Bank Guarantees

Housing Finance Bank Ltd v Commissioner General URA (HCCS 259 of 2014)

Housing Finance Bank Ltd v Commissioner General URA (HCCS 259 of 2014) [2017] UGCommC 54 (6 April 2017)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

HCCS 259 of 2014

The court found that the Agency Notice issued by the Defendant was invalid because it was issued simultaneously with the tax assessment, contrary to the statutory requirement that a taxpayer must be given a 45-day window to object to an assessment before an Agency Notice can be lawfully issued. The Defendant failed to prove proper service of the assessment notice on the taxpayer, and the purported service through an agent at an address no longer associated with the taxpayer was insufficient. The Plaintiff was not liable for the tax because the delay in executing the Agency Notice was caused b…

Source excerpt

• Agency Notices
• Tax Assessment Procedure
• Third Party Liability
• Service Of Process
• Capital Gains Tax
• Vat

Samuel Mayanja v Uganda Revenue Authority (HCT-00-CC-MC 17 of 2005)

Samuel Mayanja v Uganda Revenue Authority (HCT-00-CC-MC 17 of 2005) [2006] UGCommC 42 (10 October 2006)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

HCT-00-CC-MC 17 of 2005

The High Court dismissed a taxpayer’s bid to stop URA agency notices, finding no sufficient basis for injunction relief and no proven compliance with the 30% deposit requirement.

• Temporary Injunction
• Agency Notices
• Tax Assessment Challenge
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Tax-law
• Temporary-injunction