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

Brema Construction Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Miscellaneous Application 298 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 162 (KLR) (10 March 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KETAT 162 (KLR) Tax Appeals Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Tax Appeals Tribunal
Case number
162
Citation
[2023] KETAT 162 (KLR)
Decided
10 March 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeMiscellaneous ApplicationPostureApplication for extension of time to appealCoramOdek
Holding

The Tribunal dismissed the application for extension of time to appeal.

Facts

Brema Construction Limited sought an extension of time to file its appeal due to medical challenges to its director, Linet Nyanchama Onchon'ga, who was unable to file documents due to her illness.

Issues

  1. Whether the appeal is merited
  2. Whether there is a reasonable cause for the delay
  3. Whether the application for extension has been brought without undue delay
  4. Whether there will be prejudice suffered by the Respondent if the extension is granted

Reasoning

The Tribunal considered the criteria set out in previous cases and found that the appeal was not merited and that there was no reasonable cause for the delay.

Outcome

The application for extension of time to appeal was dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for the extension of time be and is hereby dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Tax Appeals Tribunal Act, 2013
  • Tax Procedures Act
Cases cited (6)
  • Edith Gichugu Koine vs Stephen Njagi Thoithi
  • Sammy Mwangi Kiriethe & 2 others v Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd
  • John Kuria v Kelen Wahito
  • Kiu & another v Khaemba & 3 others
  • Wasike V Swala
  • Kiu & another v Khaemba & 3 others
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case