Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Uganda Revenue Authority v Skenya Motors (U) Limited (Civil Appeal 3 of 2014) [2024] UGCommC 4 (29 January 2024)
The High Court allowed a tax appeal, finding director payments were improperly authorized and could be recharacterized for tax purposes. It upheld penal tax and set aside the TAT ruling.
Commissioner General and Another v Airtel Uganda Limited [2023] UGSC 33 (12 September 2023)
The Supreme Court held that under Section 65(3) of the Value Added Tax Act, penal tax accrues on unpaid VAT from the due date, regardless of whether the taxpayer has lodged an objection or paid 30% of the disputed tax as required by the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act. The Court found that neither the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act nor the Constitution expressly suspends the accrual of penal tax during the pendency of objection proceedings or appeals. The Court emphasized that statutory interpretation of tax laws must be based on clear language, and no suspension of penal tax can be implied where Parliame…
Source excerpt
Commissioner General, Uganda Revenue Authority v Airtel (U) Limited (Civil Appeal 32 of 2020) [2023] UGSC 64 (12 September 2023)
The Supreme Court held that penal tax under Section 65(3) of the Value Added Tax Act continues to accrue on unpaid tax from the due date, even when a taxpayer lodges an objection or appeal. The Court found no statutory provision in either the Value Added Tax Act or the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act that suspends the accrual of penal tax during the pendency of objection proceedings. The requirement to pay 30% of the disputed tax under Section 15(1) of the TAT Act is a procedural prerequisite for lodging an objection, not a suspension of penal tax on the remaining balance. The Court emphasized that…
Source excerpt
Kwasa Logistics Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 151 of 2022) [2023] UGTAT 37 (24 March 2023)
The Tribunal dismissed Kwasa Logistics’ challenge to VAT assessments and penal tax, holding the new arguments were outside the objection decision and costs followed.
Balondemu v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 18 of 2022) [2022] UGTAT 31 (14 December 2022)
The Tribunal set aside both a UGX 20 million penal tax and a UGX 665,738,205 income tax assessment, finding insufficient proof against the applicant.
Advent city Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 28 of 2018) [2020] UGTAT 20 (4 November 2020)
The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient documentation to substantiate its input tax credit claims for transactions with Patrol Enterprises Limited and Ms. Lukia Kayongo Nakiwolo. The absence of original invoices, delivery notes, proof of payment, and VAT returns rendered the transactions unverifiable and the claims unsupported. The burden of proof rested on the applicant, who did not challenge the VAT assessment during the hearing. The Tribunal upheld the respondent's disallowance of input tax credit and the VAT assessment of Shs 223,056,932. Regarding penal tax, th…
Source excerpt
J.P Construction Service Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 17 of 2009) [2011] UGTAT 3 (14 February 2011)
The Tribunal upheld penal tax assessments against J.P. Construction Services Ltd for unpaid VAT and false or misleading returns, and dismissed the application with costs.
