Kisima Electro Mechanicals Limited v Commissioner of Customs and Border Control (Tax Appeal E369 of 2025) [2026] KETAT 9 (KLR) (16 January 2026) (Judgment)
- Court
- Tax Appeals Tribunal
- Case number
- 9
- Citation
- [2026] KETAT 9 (KLR)
- Decided
- 16 January 2026
The Tribunal finds that the Appellant did not object to the demand notice within the statutory timeline and thus, the demand notice is not appealable.
Facts
The Appellant, Kisima Electro Mechanicals Limited, imported solar water heating systems and was issued a demand notice by the Respondent, Commissioner of Customs and Border Control, for Kshs 4,024,197.21. The Appellant filed an objection and a review decision, but later defaulted on the payment plan.
Issues
- Whether there is an appealable decision before the Tribunal
- Whether the Respondent erred in re-classifying the Appellant's imported goods
- Whether the Respondent breached the Appellant’s legitimate expectation
Reasoning
The Tribunal determined that the Appellant did not file its application for review within 30 days of the demand notice, contrary to the provisions of Section 229(1) of the EACCMA. The Tribunal also noted that the Appellant did not seek leave to file the application out of time.
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed.
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Tax Appeals Tribunal Cap 469A of the Laws of Kenya
- Kenya Revenue Authority Act, CAP 469 of Kenya's Laws
Cases cited (2)
- Speaker of the National Assembly v Karume (Civil Application 92 of 1992) [1992] KECA 42 (KLR)
- Samuel Kamau & Another v Kenya Commercial Bank & Others [Application No. 2 of 2011] 92012 KESC (KLR)
Loading judgment…