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

Home Bridge Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tax Appeal 43 of 2019) [2021] KETAT 59 (KLR) (23 July 2021) (Judgment)

[2021] KETAT 59 (KLR) Tax Appeals Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Tax Appeals Tribunal
Case number
59
Citation
[2021] KETAT 59 (KLR)
Decided
23 July 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTax AppealPostureAppeal from a decision of the Commissioner of Domestic TaxesCoramMAH AT SOMAN E, WILFRED GICHUKI, ROSE WAMBUI N AMU, JOHN KlNYUA WANGARI
Holding

The land cost incurred by the Appellant in purchasing LR. 12715/538 for the construction of Lifestyles Terraces located in Syokimau is allowed. Loan Interest costs, Marketing & Advertising costs, and Start-up costs are disallowed.

Facts

The Appellant, Home Bridge Limited, developed housing estates in Syokimau and Ruiru. The Respondent, Commissioner of Domestic Taxes, issued an additional assessment for taxes, which the Appellant contested.

Issues

  1. Whether the Respondent was proper in disallowing the land costs
  2. Whether the Respondent was proper in disallowing the Loan Interest Cost, Marketing and Advertising Cost
  3. Whether the Respondent was proper in disallowing the Start-up costs

Reasoning

The Tribunal considered the Agreement for Sale, Transfer, and valuation report, and found that the land cost was allowable. The Appellant failed to prove that the start-up costs were administrative costs.

Outcome

Partially merited appeal

Orders

  • The land cost incurred by the Appellant in purchasing LR. 12715/538 for the construction of Lifestyles Terraces located in Syokimau is allowed.
  • Loan Interest costs are disallowed.
  • Marketing & Advertising costs are disallowed.
  • Start-up costs are disallowed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Income Tax Act
  • Kenya Revenue Authority Act
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 0.6 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case