CLEAR YOUR CACHE OR, POTENTIALLY, PAY SARS THE CASH?
Author: Nico Theron (CTA) SA and Hopolang Mollo (Tax Consultant) Can SARS take collection steps against taxpayers who are victims of fraud? Prevention is better than cure. Maybe, just maybe, that riveting animated training course sent through by Mark from IT on phishing and vigilance against official impersonation may have prevented all of this. Hindsight, […]
USP’s, BONA FIDE INADVERTENT ERROR, THISTLE AND CORONATION
The grounds for SARS’ cross-appeal in the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) on Understatement Penalties (USP’s) in the Coronation case deserves a discussion (exactly because the ConCourt did not have to deal with it). The crux of it, at least as I read it, is this: The words “bona fide inadvertent error” must be seen as consisting […]
REVENUE AUGMENTATION: LOW-HANGING FRUIT!
In an apparent effort to win the war against non-compliance, it appears SARS has taken to augmenting taxpayer’s revenue. Whilst perhaps not a new thing, it certainly seems to be taking place on a larger scale than in the past. Stated differently, it seems more and more taxpayers are being asked to explain deposits in […]
TAX DISPUTES: HIGH COURT? TAX COURT? NO COURT?
Taxpayers are often aggrieved by SARS’ assessments and decisions. The Tax Administration Act, 2011 (“TAA”) provides a mechanism for taxpayers to raise these grievances through a process referred to as objection and appeal. The objection and appeal process is to a large extent, an internal process, meaning that SARS itself has to listen to these […]
THE LION MATCH CASE: SHOULD SARS’ CASE NOT HAVE GONE UP IN FLAMES?
In the Lion Match case[1] SARS argued for an increase in its own assessment. In other words, for the sake of simple explanation, SARS originally raised a capital gains tax liability of R10 and when the dispute reached litigation, SARS effectively argued that their own assessment is wrong and that the CGT bill should in […]
DOES “GROUNDS FOR ASSESSMENT” MEAN SARS MUST GIVE AMOUNTS?
In a case heard by the High Court[1] recently, one of the issues considered was the meaning of the term “grounds for assessment” for the purposes of section 42(2)(b) of the Tax Administration Act, 28 of 2011 (“the TAA”). Background The background to this issue is briefly that SARS issued a notice to the taxpayer […]
PAY ATTENTION TO SARS’ TIME PERIOD BREACHES
The tax dispute process is strictly regulated by the Tax Administration Act (TAA) and a set of rules. The TAA and the rules set out what a taxpayer must do and what SARS must do if the taxpayer challenges SARS. In addition, the TAA and the rules prescribe time periods for almost every step in […]
LATE OBJECTIONS – CONDONATION EXPLAINED
Objections are often submitted late and, as tax dispute resolution experts, Unicus has probably heard all the reasons for objections being late. Unfortunately, getting condonation from SARS for a late objection has become increasingly difficult, probably, in part, because of the relatively new 80-day time period for objections. Another reason we see for SARS’ refusal […]
I-CA(N)T BELIEVE THIS: RIGHT CONCLUSION, WRONG REASON (WITH RESPECT) AND TACTICS TO REFUSE A TAX DEDUCTION?
The High Court handed down judgment in the matter between I-CAT International Consulting (Pty) Ltd v CSARS [1] recently, in which the court had to determine whether an assessment had become prescribed in terms of the Tax Administration Act, 28 of 2011 (“the TAA”). This followed consequently upon an application brought by the taxpayer to […]
CAN YOU MESS UP A TAX DISPUTE?
Can you really mess up a tax dispute? At the end of the day, it’s just a document you need to submit to SARS and add a document or two. How hard can it really be? In fact, based on past experience, objections used to be smooth sailing (apart from time delays). One might therefore […]