Uganda Case Law

Nile Breweries Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 100 of 2022; Application 110 of 2022; Application 46 of 2022)

Nile Breweries Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 100 of 2022; Application 110 of 2022; Application 46 of 2022) [2023] UGTAT 47 (28 November 2023)

Court

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

Case number

Application 100 of 2022 ; Application 110 of 2022 ; Application 46 of 2022

Judges

Mugenyi, Chairperson, Akabway, Panel Member, Katwe

The Tribunal held that beer delivered to Ugandan agents was a local supply, not an export, and upheld VAT and local excise duty assessments against Nile Breweries.

• Vat Liability
• Excise Duty On Exports
• Agency Relationship In Tax
• Zero Rating Of Exports
• Documentary Proof Of Export
• Tax Assessment Challenge

Quickway Property Services Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 105 of 2021)

Quickway Property Services Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 105 of 2021) [2023] UGTAT 2 (21 February 2023)

Court

Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)

Case number

Application No. TAT 105 of 2021

Judges

Akabway, Panel Member, Mugenyi, Chairperson

The tribunal found that the applicant failed to discharge its burden of proof to establish entitlement to the input tax credit claimed. The receipts provided as proof of payment were not sequentially numbered, lacked basic features of a credible cash receipting system, and could not be independently verified. The tribunal considered the improbability of large cash transactions and the lack of supporting entries in the supplier's records as undermining the credibility of the applicant's claim. The statutory requirements for tax invoices and receipts, including serialization and sufficient deta…

Source excerpt

• Vat Input Credit
• Tax Assessment Challenge
• Evidence Of Payment
• Burden Of Proof
• Administrative Decisions

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