TAXPAYERS BEWARE: SARS’ INDEFINITE EXTENSION
On 4 June 2025, the SCA ruled[1] that SARS is not required to request condonation if they remedy their default within the 15-day notice period contemplated in rule 56(1) of the Tax Court Rules (“the rules”) gazetted under section 103 of the Tax Administration Act 2011 (“the TAA”). What this means, practically speaking, is that […]
3 IMPORTANT LESSONS FROM THE TAX COURT
On 25 February 2025, the Johannesburg tax court handed down judgment in Taxpayer D v CSARS (IT35476) from which taxpayers can learn three very important lessons in the context of tax dispute resolution: Understand the concept of onus of proof and how to discharge that onus In this case, one of the taxpayer’s companies showed […]
TRUST RESOLUTIONS – TIMING MATTERS AND “THEY” KNOW IT
It seems it is/was a common practice amongst some trustees to pass resolutions for distributions to beneficiaries of the trust after the end of the financial year (typically around the time the financials are being finalised). It appears SARS has become aware of this and is holding the trust accountable for the income tax on […]
THE ARROW THAT MISSED THE MARK?
In a recent judgment handed down by the Johannesburg tax court in Taxpayer Arrow v CSARS (IT45776), the court had to determine, amongst various other things, (a) whether SARS could lift the veil of prescription and (b) whether SARS’ was correct in imposing understatement penalties under the circumstances. Briefly, the background to the case was […]
SARS INCORRECTLY ASSESSING A TAXPAYER
For a video explanation of this judgment see 3 parts below: Part 1 of 3 – Pear (Pty) Ltd vs CSARS (ITC146080) (Western Cape Tax Court) (5 December 2024) – Background Part 2 of 3 – Pear (Pty) Ltd vs CSARS (ITC146080) (Western Cape Tax Court) (5 December 2024) – The judgment on prescription Part […]
YES, YOU REALLY CAN MESS UP A SARS OBJECTION!
For a detailed further video explanation see my video on our Youtube Channel – Click Here The judgment of the Western Cape Tax Court in the matter of DR X and Dr X Inc v CSARS[1] (“the Dr X case”) appears to be a good example to explain how it is possible to screw up […]
THE THISTLE JUDGMENT
On 2 October 2024, the Constitutional Court issued a judgement in the case of The Thistle Trust v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service [2024] ZACC 19 that was both highly anticipated and somewhat contentious. The Thistle case has elicited a significant amount of discussion among tax professionals, with some sympathising with the majority […]
THE PARADOX OF VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE: AI, SARS, AND THE FEAR FACTOR
In an era defined by rapid technological advancement, the concept of “voluntary disclosure” is experiencing a seismic shift. Taxpayers, who once viewed the opportunity to come forward and declare financial irregularities to the South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) as an empowering choice, are now faced with a pressing dilemma: Are these disclosures genuinely voluntary, or […]
CONCOURT ON BONA FIDE INADVERTENT ERROR AND USP’s
The eagerly anticipated Constitutional Court judgment in Thistle case[1] has been delivered. Unfortunately, though, the court did not consider the meaning of the words “bona fide inadvertent error” because the court did not grant SARS leave to cross-appeal the judgment of the SCA insofar as USP’s are concerned. The question then is, where does that […]
TAX DISPUTES: SARS MUST ALSO COMPLY WITH THE RULES
When entering into a tax dispute with SARS, taxpayers are often reminded by SARS of the very strict time periods and prescribed rules and procedures that must be followed by the taxpayer. And yes, taxpayers should comply with the procedures and time periods as failing to do so is likely to result in adverse consequences […]