Kenyan case law

Dutch Flower Group Kenya Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 690 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 102 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Appeal is dismissed, and the Respondent’s objection decision is upheld.

Total E & P International K1 Ltd (Kenya Branch) v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 395 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 143 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal finds that the Respondent did not err in law and in fact in subjecting the Appellant’s recharges to Withholding tax at the rate of 12.5%.

Cyka Manpower Services Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 21 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 163 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal held that the Respondent’s objection decision was not valid as it was issued 70 days beyond the statutory period prescribed in Section 51(11) of the Taxpayer Protection Act.

Yogi Supermarket Limited v Commissioner Domestic Taxes (Appeal 833 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 172 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed

Co-operative Bank of Kenya v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 523 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 100 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal held that the Interchange Fees and Merchant Service Fees are exempt from VAT.

Holdwadag Construction Company Limited v Commisioner of Investigations & Enforcement (Appeal 606 of 2020) [2023] KETAT 170 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal found the Respondent’s objection decision valid and upheld the tax assessment.

Universal Impex Limited v Commissioner of Customs & Border Control (Tribunal Appeal 563 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 99 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal found that the Commissioner did not err in demanding the short-levied taxes.

Farmers Wells Limited v Commisioner Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 179 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 107 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The objection decision dated March 26, 2021 is invalid and unlawful for contravening Section 51(11) of the TPA. The Appellant’s notice of objection is allowed by operation of law.

Echenje v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 383 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 103 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal finds the Appellant guilty of laches for not following the procedure to lodge an objection within the specified time and that the Respondent was right to invalidate the Appellant's objection for being time-barred.

Samrose Enterprises Limited v Commissioner of Investigations and Enforcement (Appeal 128 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 165 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The appeal is valid, the GPR of 5.6% is not justified, and input VAT was not disallowed arbitrarily.

Salsa Global Investment Co Ltd v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 254 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 164 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal found that the Appellant’s appeal was not properly before the Tribunal due to the late filing of the Notice of Appeal and lack of leave from the Tribunal.

Loyalty Refined Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 382 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 147 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal held that the Respondent was justified in disallowing the Appellant’s VAT input tax claims due to the late submission of the VAT returns beyond the six-month period.

Mount Kenya Breweries Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 591 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 175 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The appeal is valid and the objection was allowed by operation of the law.

Vinepack Limited v Commissioner of Investigations &Enforcement (Appeal 552 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 130 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal quashed the Commissioner's assessment and ordered that no tax is payable.

Sera Steel Limited v commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 464 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 167 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Appeal is dismissed as the Respondent’s rejection of the Appellant’s application for extension of time was not merited.

Olare Suppliers Limited v Commssioner Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 362 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 149 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The respondent’s objection decision is invalid and irregular

Price Waterhouse Coopers Limited v Commissioner for Legal Services & Board Coordination (Appeal 576 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 168 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal found that the Respondent did not deny the existence of the tax credits but rather disallowed them based on the provisions of Section 42 of the ITA.

Uni-Truck World Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 579 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 169 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The objection was allowed by operation of the law as the Respondent did not respond to the objection within sixty days.

Golden Cara Investments Limited v Commissioner for Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 703 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 101 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal finds that the Commissioner did not breach the Appellant's right to fair administrative action.

Firtree Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 37 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 106 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal found that the respondent’s assessment and objection decision were not proper in law and justified.

Total E & P International K2 Ltd (Kenya Branch) v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 396 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 166 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal held that the head office recharges should be classified as service fees and not management fees.

Crescent-Tech Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Appeal 699 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 171 (KLR) (Civ) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal finds that the objection decision was made within the statutory timelines and that the Appellant supplied all required documents.

Emergency Relief Supplies Limited v Commissioner of Customs & Border Control (Appeal 108 of 2021) [2023] KETAT 173 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal held that the Solarsack does not meet the criteria to be classified as a water purifying apparatus under HS code 84:21.

Bami Investment Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes (Tribunal Appeal 271 of 2022) [2023] KETAT 105 (KLR) (10 February 2023) (Judgment)

✦ The Tribunal found that the Appellant failed to provide supporting documents as required by the VAT Act, and thus the Respondent's assessment was not erroneous.

Victorious Investments Limited v Commissioner for Investigations & Enforcement (Appeal 311 of 2021) [2022] KETAT 1193 (KLR) (Appeals) (9 September 2022) (Judgment)