F-CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Bertelsmann J
• Judgment Date: 10 September 2010
• Docket Number: VAT 789
• Court: Tax Court
• Hearing Date: 10 September 2012
• Citation: 2013 JDR 0356 (Tax)

Bertelsmann, J

The appellant taxpayer submitted vague Vat return that were not supported by VAT input invoices, although the taxpayer deducted the purchase prices of the goods he obtained from the output amounts. The Commissioner decided to institute a tax audit on the issues of assessment on the7th of March 2008 in the amount of R4 553 000.00

2013 JDR 0356 p2

Bertelsmann, J

The taxpayer objected on the basis that the tax invoices could not be obtained from the supplier due to an alleged fraud perpetrated by an administrative official in the supplier's service. Reliance was placed on behalf of the taxpayer on section 20(7) 0f the VAT Act 89 of 1991

This subsection reads as follows:

"(7)

Where the Commissioner is satisfied that there are or will be sufficient records available to establish the particulars of any supply or category of supplies, and that it would be impractical to require that full tax invoice be issued in terms of this section, the Commissioner may, subject to such conditions as the Commissioner may consider necessary, direct-

(a)

that any one or more of the particulars specified in subsection (4) or (5) shall not be contained in a tax invoice; or

(b)

that a tax invoice is not required to be issued ; or

(c)

that the particulars specified in subsection (4) or (5) be furnished in any other manner."

The Commissioner is correct in disallowing the objection.

The taxpayer appealed against this assessment in the failure to act in terms of Section 20(7).

The Commissioner raised the point in limine that this court does not have jurisdiction to deal with an appeal against the decision by the Commissioner taken under section 20(7). Reliance was placed with this submission on the first instance upon section 32(1) and section 32(4) of the Act states:

32.

"Objections to certain decisions or assessments.-

(1)

Any person who is dissatisfied with-

(a)

any decision given in writing by the Commissioner-

(i)

in terms of section 23 (7) notifying that person of the Commissioner's refusal to register that person in terms of the Act; or

(ii)

in terms of section 24 (6) or (7) notifying that person of the Commissioner's decision to cancel any registration of that person in terms of this Act or of the Commissioner's refusal to cancel such registration; or

2013 JDR 0356 p3

Bertelsmann, J

(iii)

in terms of section 44 (8) of the Commissioner's refusal to make a refund; or

(iv)

refusing to approve a method for determining the ration contemplated in section 17(1); or

(v)

in terms of section 43 (5) and (6)...