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, 04:28 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

11 Nov 2021

Tax Law [2021] UGTAT 26

Latigo v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 88 of 2019)

Latigo v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 88 of 2019) [2021] UGTAT 26 (11 November 2021)

Court: Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)
Case number: Application 88 of 2019
Judges: Ali, Panel Member

The Tribunal found that the applicant was entitled to a reward only for the tax recovered as a direct result of the information provided in the Tax Evaders Information Form (TIF), specifically relating to withholding tax for the period 2014-2016. The compliance review, prompted by the applicant's information, led to the recovery of Shs. 604,281,243, for which the applicant was paid Shs. 60,428,124 (10%). However, further evidence established that the total withholding tax recovered for the relevant period was Shs. 965,570,779, entitling the applicant to a total reward of Shs. 96,557,077.9. Si…

Source excerpt

Tax Informer Rewards
Tax Evasion Reporting
Tax Procedure Code Act Application
Withholding Tax Disputes
Tax Audit And Compliance
Reward Entitlement

Read case analysis

15 Oct 2020

Tax Law [2020] UGTAT 23

Okuja v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 72 of 2018)

Okuja v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. TAT 72 of 2018) [2020] UGTAT 23 (15 October 2020)

Court: Tax Appeals Tribunal (Uganda)
Case number: Application No. TAT 72 of 2018
Judges: Ali, Panel Member, Mugerwa, Mugenyi, Chairperson

The Tribunal held that exports of unprocessed foodstuffs and unprocessed agricultural products are zero-rated supplies under the VAT Act, not exempt supplies, by operation of the Third Schedule and Section 77, which gives priority to zero-rating in case of overlap. The applicant's information did not reveal any unlawful VAT refunds, as the respondent was correct in treating the exports as zero-rated and paying VAT refunds accordingly. Since the information did not lead to the recovery of any tax, the applicant was not entitled to a reward as an informer. The Tribunal also clarified that while…