SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

APM Terminals Kenya Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 368 of 2019) [2021] KETAT 12 (KLR) (23 July 2021) (Judgment)

[2021] KETAT 12 (KLR) Tax Appeals Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Tax Appeals Tribunal
Case number
12
Citation
[2021] KETAT 12 (KLR)
Decided
23 July 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTax AppealPostureAppeal from a VAT assessmentCoramEstcourt, Majanja, Nyamu
Holding

The Tribunal held that the services provided to international sea carriers are zero-rated and the Appellant's Notice of Objection was allowed by operation of law.

Facts

APM Terminals Kenya Limited applied for VAT refunds for zero-rated services to international sea carriers, but the Commissioner of Domestic Taxes denied the refunds and issued assessments.

Issues

  1. Whether services to international sea carriers are zero-rated
  2. Whether the Appellant's Notice of Objection was allowed by operation of law
  3. Whether the Respondent erred in charging penalties and interests without legal basis
  4. Whether the iTax generated confirmation assessment notices constitute valid objections

Reasoning

The Tribunal found that the services provided to international sea carriers are zero-rated and that the Appellant's Notice of Objection was allowed by operation of law.

Outcome

Affirmed the Tribunal's decision to allow the Appellant's Notice of Objection and to declare that the services provided to international sea carriers are zero-rated.

Orders

  • Affirmed the Tribunal's decision to allow the Appellant's Notice of Objection
  • Declared that the services provided to international sea carriers are zero-rated

Remedies

  • Refunds of Kshs. 115,159,024

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • VAT Act, 2013
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 2.0 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case