Supreme Court of Appeal 

Supreme Court of Appeal

For additional access to the full reports of the Southern African cases you can click on one of the following links:


page 1 of 3 - Items per page:

Ackermans Limited v CSARS

Ackermans Limited requested the court to give an order for the review and setting aside of a decision made by SARS to raise additional assessments for the years 1998 to 2013.

South Atlantic Jazz Festival v CSARS (also reported as ABC v CSARS)

This is an appeal (to the High Court) against the judgment of the tax court (see VAT Case 872 on the Tax suite website) dismissing the vendor’s appeal to that court brought in terms of section 33 of the Value Added Tax Act.

Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape v Parker

This is a criminal law case where the State requested the Supreme Court of Appeal to decide ‘whether a VAT vendor, who has misappropriated an amount of VAT which it has collected on behalf of SARS can be charged with the common law crime of theft.’

CSARS v Bosch

In this instance the Supreme Court of Appeal dealt with as hare option scheme (section 8A(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act where employees were given an option to purchase shares on a deferred delivery basis. The issue was whether date of exercise of option or date of payment for and receipt of shares the date for determining any gain to be included in the taxpayer’s income. The court had to determine whether the contract arising from exercise of option was conditional (subject to a suspensive condition). Finally the court had to decide whether the contracts between employees and the trust administering scheme were simulated transactions.

CSARS v Tradex (Pty) Ltd and two others

In this case the high court had to consider preservation orders dealt with in section 163(4) of the Tax Administration Act. Judge Rogers didn’t consider that in this instance a preservation order was (or is) ‘required’ securing the collection of tax by SARS within the meaning of section 163(3). What make interesting reading in the case are the four observations made by the Judge with regard to preservation orders.

Shuttleworth v South African Reserve Bank

This is not a tax specific case and dealt with exchange control – specifically regulation 10(1)(c) of the Exchange Control Regulations. At issue was the lawfulness of the imposition of a ten per cent exit levy by the South African Reserve Bank on the value of assets sought to be exported upon emigration and whether the court can order repayment of the levy.

SARS v Pretoria East Motors (Pty) Ltd

The dispute between SARS and the taxpayer arose from an audit done by SARS and the subsequent assessments to additional income tax and Value-Added Tax raised by SARS.

GB Mining v C: SARS

A number of issues were in dispute in this case. The first issue dealt with by Judge Swain relates to whether or not the objection and appeal process is appropriate where the tax returns contain incorrect information. GB Mining was then unable to provide credible and reliable evidence to explain the alleged error in describing the amount in question as an "OTR loan” in its financial statements. It was then confirmed that the disposal of a right was the disposal of an asset. The apportionment by SARS of the expenses claimed for overseas travel on a 50:50 basis was held to be fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. In the final instance the additional taxes imposed were considered.

Chittenden NO and Another v SARS and CIPC

This case, brought before the High Court by a business rescue practitioner, concerned two matters, namely the issuance of a tax certificate and SARS's vote against the practitioner's revised business plan.

Roshcon (Pty) Ltd v Anchor Auto Body Builders CC - ZASCA 40

In this instance the Supreme Court of Appeal had to deal with the issue of ownership of movable property and whether a transaction is simulated or disguised. The test to be applied to determine this is discussed and it is stated that each case must be decided on its own merits.

MTN International v CSARS

A SARS official manually fixed the ‘due date’ on a revised assessment to one day prior to the day on which the assessment was actually raised

CSARS v Mobile Telephone Networks Holdings (Pty) Ltd

At issue was the deduction of audit fees incurred for a dual purpose.

CSARS v M Krok

This case, in which judgement was handed down on 31 January 2014, deals with the Exchange of information in terms of the double taxation treaty and the protocol thereto. It also deals with the ability of SARS to obtain a preservation order in terms of the Tax Administration Act.

Stabilpave v SARS

This decision in this case ((615/12) [2013] ZASCA 128) was handed down by the Supreme Court of Appeal on 26 September 2013. It dealt with the interesting question that arose when SARS posted a cheque to Stabilpave’s postal address (the taxpayer), but the cheque was stolen and paid to a thief. SARS’s contention was that its obligation to pay the tax refund is legally deemed to be fulfilled even though the amount of the cheque was never credited to Stabilpave.

Master Currency v CSARS

In this case the Supreme Court of Appeal had to consider whether the supply of services by a bureaux de change in a duty free area at an international airport should be zero rated in terms of section 11(2)(l) of Value-Added Tax Act 89 of 1991. In arriving at the decision that it did not qualify to be zero rated the Judge considered some interesting arguments and confirmed under which circumstances a supply will qualify for the rate of zero percent in terms of section 11(2)(l).

Computek v the Commissioner, SARS

In this case SARS raised an assessment on the vendor after an audit. The vendor filed a notice of objection with SARS, but nowhere on that objection form or on any of the annexure filed commensurately with it was it stated that there was an objection to the capital amount.

Armgold/Harmony Freegold Joint Venture v CSARS

[2012] ZASCA 152 (1October 2012)
In this Income tax case the Supreme Court of Appeal dealt with the deduction of mining capital expenditure under subsections 36(7F) and 36(7E) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 as well as with the method of calculation to be adopted where a mine of a taxpayer operates at a loss.

CSARS v Plasmaview Technologies (Pty) Ltd

This Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) judgment illustrates the importance of importers requesting tariff determinations in respect of differing goods, even if the goods may seem similar in nature. In reaching a decision, the judge referred to section 47(9) of the Customs & Excise Act, No. 91 of 1964, in terms of which a tariff determination only applies in respect of a specific product.

Cassimjee v Minister of Finance

This case dealt with a customs-related matter which was more than three decades old. The main issue was whether the KZN High Court was right in dismissing the appellant’s claim for want of prosecution. The decision depended on whether the delay was so unreasonable that it constituted an abuse of the process of court.

Oshry v Feldman

The judgement in this case (Case No 401/09) was delivered in the Supreme Court of Appeal on 19 August 2010

At issue was the claim by surviving spouse in terms of the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act. The court confirmed that the primary obligation of support rests on a spouse, and if deceased, on the estate of the spouse - provided that the jurisdictional requirements are met. The court also confirmed that a lump sum award was competent in terms of the Act.

Secure Site

Social Media