Latest Court Judgements
Ntayiya v South African Revenue Service (848/2023) [2025] ZASCA 183 (1 December 2025)
This session explores an SCA judgment regarding the imposition of understatement penalties for submission of nil returns as well as the strength of the “professional tax advice defence”. See Nico's detailed explanation video.
Ferreira v Commissioner for SARS ZAGPPHC 47, 2 Feb 2026
This session explores an SCA judgment regarding the imposition of understatement penalties for submission of nil returns as well as the strength of the “professional tax advice defence”.
See Nico's detailed explanation video.
Explanation video coming soon.
Inhlakanipho Consultants (Pty) Ltd v CSARS Case no: A333_2024 ZAGPPHC 1210
High Court case Inhlakanipho Consultants (Pty) Ltd v CSARS (A333/2024) confirms that SARS is bound by a lawfully concluded settlement agreement under the Tax Administration Act. The court held that SARS cannot rely on internal payment-allocation systems to avoid the agreed terms once the taxpayer has complied with the settlement.
Explanation video coming soon.
When a VAT dispute is settled and paid, can SARS still keep capital alive and charge interest? The Full Court in Inhlakanipho says: not so fast.
High Court in Ferrerìa v CSARS slams SARS’ refusal to suspend payment under section 164 of the TAA, holding that procedural fairness is no shield for irrational decisions. A landmark judgment reshaping SOP disputes and taxpayer rights in South Africa.
When the Tax Court and SARS Disagree — What Should Taxpayers Do Next?
A recent Tax Court judgment found that certain raising fees qualify as “similar finance charges” under section 24J of the Income Tax Act — but SARS’ own Interpretation Note says they do not. This clash of interpretations creates real uncertainty for businesses deciding how to treat these fees for tax purposes. While the court’s decision supports deductibility, SARS’ official stance may lead to additional assessments and penalties — leaving taxpayers to ask: what now? Discover your options and how to navigate this interpretative tug-of-war.
youTube Channel
Check out the Unicus Tax YouTube channel for deep dives into important technical tax issues over the last couple of weeks.
It seems my predictions about SARS continuing to be aggressive in 2026 is holding. They are, in my experience, acting decisively and quickly – raising additional assessments and collecting tax debts. Taxpayers who do not respond in kind will struggle to keep the modern SARS in check. Gone are the days when dealing with SARS’ assessments can be put off to be dealt with/figured out later. Taxpayers need fast, decisive, accurate and legally grounded responses.
Hear more what Nico has to say on his various social media platforms
here:
New from SARS
SARS’ interpretation note 142 purports to be a note explaining what constitutes “similar finance charges” for the purposes of section 24J when really, it appears rather to be aimed mainly at contradicting a tax court judgment handed down a year earlier in favour of a taxpayer. In essence, the question is whether raising fees are deductible. The court says it is, SARS says its not. Who is right?
Draft SARS Interpretation Note (2025-42) outlining how section 7C of the South African Income Tax Act applies to loans, advances, or credit provided by a connected natural person to a trust, including definitions, application rules, and anti-avoidance measures to prevent tax-free wealth transfers via low or interest-free loans.
Debts are often written off or restructured in some way. These typically tend to have tax consequences. This session discusses what those tax consequences are.
2 March 2026 – Supreme Court of Appeal Judgments
- Lutzkie v CSARS (1135/2023) [2026] ZASCA 11 (06 February 2026)
Summaries are available on the Supreme Court of Appeal judgments page
25 February 2026 – National Legislation
Unicus Tax Team Achievements
