Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 1 court collection
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 05:46 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

30 Dec 2023

Tax Law [2023] UGCommC 162

Uganda Revenue Authority v Mukwano Enterprises Limited

Uganda Revenue Authority v Mukwano Enterprises Limited (Civil Appeal 55 of 2019) [2023] UGCommC 162 (30 December 2023)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: Civil Appeal 55 of 2019
Judge: Mutesi, J

The court held that premium payments made by the respondent for the acquisition of 20 leases are capital expenditures, not deductible from chargeable income under Section 22(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act. The respondent's business model involved acquiring leases, developing properties, and deriving rental income over the lease term, making the leases fixed assets rather than circulating capital. The respondent's own financial statements classified prepaid operating lease rentals as non-current assets, reinforcing their capital nature. Rent payments, however, are recurrent expenditures made to m…

Source excerpt

Deductibility Of Expenditure
Capital Vs Revenue Expenditure
Corporation Tax Assessment
Real Estate Business Taxation

Read case analysis

20 Feb 2019

Tax Law [2019] UGCommC 3

Goldstar Insurance Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority

Goldstar Insurance Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2016) [2019] UGCommC 3 (20 February 2019)

Court: Commercial Court of Uganda
Case number: Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2016

The court held that contingency reserves, though statutorily required under the Insurance Act, do not constitute allowable deductions under the Income Tax Act because they are not expenditures or losses incurred in the production of income. The sums appropriated to contingency reserves remain under the control and ownership of the insurer and may be invested for the insurer's benefit. The mere statutory requirement to set aside such reserves does not transform them into deductible expenses for tax purposes. Furthermore, the Appellant failed to provide evidence that the tax assessment was time…