Taxation law

Uganda Revenue Authority v Rwakashaija Azarious & 2 Ors ((Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2007)) [2009] UGCA 24 (30 March 2009);


Search Summary: 

The respondents as whistle blowers were awarded 11% of monies recovered from alleged tax evasion. The appellants averred that the trial judge erred in law and fact when he failed to properly evaluate the evidence before him thereby coming to a wrong conclusion that the respondents provided information to the appellant that led to recovery of all taxes in issue.

Court considered the appeal.

Headnote and Holding: 

Court made reference to section 7 of the Finance Act which provides for the award of 10% of taxes recovered to whistle blowers.

therefore, evident that the taxes recovered Court held that the company which was subject of the alleged tax evasion and claim for 10% by the respondents was known to the appellant corporation and that the taxes of the company were considered as neither evaded or under declared but rather as late payment to the appellant. 

Court held that if the learned trial judge had properly evaluated the evidence before him, he would have found that the respondents gave no information to the appellant that led to the recovery of the tax in dispute.  He would have also found that the joint audit exercise between Special Revenue Protection Services and Uganda Revenue Authority did not establish a case of under declaration but delayed remittance to the appellant.  In the circumstances, the respondents were not entitled to anything in terms of section 7 of the Finance Act.

Court accordingly allowed the appeal and overturned the decision of the high court


Subscribe to RSS - Taxation law