Let's Meet

Category: Training

Lueven Metals – The limits of interpretation in tax law

This training session unpacks the Constitutional Court’s decision in Lueven Metals and its significance for tax interpretation. It explains why text, context and purpose must be read together, but cannot be used to stretch statutory wording beyond what it can reasonably bear. The session highlights the VAT zero-rating dispute, SARS’ successful argument, and the broader lesson that commercially attractive interpretations must still be grounded in the actual words of the tax provision.

VAT Consequences of Unlawful Transactions

Explore the VAT consequences of unlawful and subsequently invalidated transactions through a detailed analysis of the Ndyamara / Swifambo judgment.

This training examines the interaction between VAT liability, illegality, section 26 of the Insolvency Act, credit-note mechanisms under section 21 of the VAT Act, and key principles from MP Finance and Respublica.

Learn why a contract’s later invalidity does not necessarily erase previously triggered VAT obligations, how courts distinguish between original tax events and adjustment events, and when credit notes may provide a more effective remedy than insolvency-law recovery claims.

Key Changes in SARS’ VDP Guide Issue 2

Explore the key changes in SARS’ VDP Guide Issue 2, including eligibility, audit timing, voluntariness, penalties, cross-tax disclosure risks, rejection decisions and the finality of VDP agreements.

TAXPAYER EPP VS CSARS

In this practical training session, we unpack Tax Court judgment IT 24852 (Taxpayer EPP v SARS), where a taxpayer sought to deduct R38.8 million after customs and excise refund claims became time-barred. Explore the critical distinction between expenditure and loss under section 11(a), the timing of deductions, the impact of prescribed refund claims, understatement penalties, interest, and potential post-judgment remedies through reduced assessments and prescription exceptions under the Tax Administration Act

Binding Private Ruling 428

Binding Private Ruling 428 examines the income tax consequences of a Delayed Contribution Equity Investment Structure (DCEIS), confirming that phased share subscription proceeds constitute contributed tax capital rather than gross income.

The ruling also clarifies the interaction between sections 11D and 8(4)(a), confirming that qualifying R&D expenditure remains deductible without triggering recoupment consequences under the Income Tax Act.

Chapter 15 penalties and holding SARS Accountable

This discussion examines the critical distinction between objecting to a SARS penalty assessment and requesting remittance under the South African Tax Administration Act.

It unpacks the interaction between sections 104, 215, 220, and 224, highlighting why taxpayers may first need to seek remittance before pursuing objection and appeal remedies and explores the procedural and evidentiary consequences of each route, particularly the shifting onus of proof in understatement penalty disputes and administrative penalties before SARS and the Tax Court.

Absa and Another v CSARS [2026] ZACC 15

A comprehensive analysis of Absa and Another v CSARS, examining SARS’s application of the General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR) to complex preference share funding structures.

Taxpayer Bank Limited v SARS (VAT 32666)

Taxpayer Bank Limited

This Tax Court VAT Section 21 Judgment examines the VAT treatment of financial services, focusing on whether certain banking activities qualify as exempt supplies.

The case highlights the interpretation of “financial services” under VAT legislation and clarifies the boundaries between taxable and exempt transactions, offering key insights into compliance, input tax claims, and structuring within the banking sector.

X and Another v CSARS (A117/2025)

X and Another v CSARS

SARS objection to estimated assessments dismissed: Western Cape High Court confirms taxpayers must submit substantiating documents under Rule 7(2)(b)(iii), even where SARS bears the onus of proving an estimated assessment’s reasonableness.