taxBaddy
Konnectplus
Cases & Comments    
Account name: 

Kenya

Kapu (K) Limited

vs Commissioner for Domestic Taxes
id : 21-202100   cat : Tax Appeals tribunal-Nairobi   
a. Who is charged with the responsibility to demand and recover tax

b. Whether there were deposits for the period 2003 to 2008 which
were not declared on the Sales by the Appellant and if so how
much and who were the recipients of the deposits;

c. Whether the Appellant was involved in concealing of income for
purposes of tax avoidance;
d. Whether there were any variances in the Appellant's monthly
summaries and sales reported on VAT 3 returns;

e. What was the assessed tax liability and amount demanded;

f. Whether there was multiple accounting of sales;
case.
Judgement Appeal No.152 of 2015 Page 6

g. What is the correct gross profit margin?
h. Whether the Appellant has settled the undisputed outstanding
Asked by : Admin
 DOF : 08/07/1905
   Admin

Submissions

PDF
The appellant prays that:

The notice dated 1st February 2010 be set aside and annulled for the reason that they fail to disclose the unpaid tax for the specific period and penalties thereon

Ruling

The Tribunal holds that the Ag. Senior Commissioner Investigation and
Enforcement Department acted well within the Respondent's mandate
as provided for under Kenya Revenue Act (Cap 469) of the Laws of
Kenya and as further provided under Sections 30 and 31 of the Value
Added Tax Ca)P 476 (now repealed) to investigate and raise an
Assessment and therefore the ground of Appeal that the Ag. Senior
Commissioner Investigation and Enforcement Department had no
authority to act and raise an assessment must fail.
30. The Tribunal having entered the above findings on the Appeal
dismisses the Appeal and upholds the decision of the Commissioner to
charge VAT of Kshs.331.678,326.00.
Judgement Appeal No.152 of 2015 Page 11
31. The Tribunal holds that there were undeclared sales of
Kshs.971, 789,421. 75 giving raise to net chargeable income of
Kshs.48,589,471.00 which is the admitted 50/0 of net chargeable
income as per the Appellant's Tax Agent's Letter dated 17th August
2011 resulting in Corporation Tax of Kshs.14,576,841.00 being the
principle tax payable by the Appellant.
32. % The Tribunal finds that any pending interest of each Party due are payable in accordance with the law

Each party shall bear its own costs
posted by : Admin
 DOR : 07/12/2016
  

You may NOT repond to a case you posted
KINDLY ATTEMPT a different one.
   Yes
taxBaddy.com @2014-2024 All rights reserved
Powered by : gravityworks@taxbaddy.com