AFGRI Uganda Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (TAT Application No 18 of 2019)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Tribunal held that the applicant was liable to pay withholding tax on interest paid to its non-resident parent company. The loans did not qualify for exemption under s.83(5) of the Income Tax Act because they were not 'widely issued'—the debentures were between only two parties, not issued to the public. Withholding tax is due when interest is paid, not merely when it accrues, per s.47(2). The Tribunal found that the applicant had paid interest based on its financial statements and tax returns, which showed interest expensed as deductible allowances. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Outcome
Application dismissed; applicant liable for withholding tax assessment of Shs. 912,934,373.58
Facts
AFGRI Uganda Limited, a Ugandan company, is 99% owned by Afgri Agri Services Mauritius. Between 2014 and 2017, the parent company granted interest-bearing loans to the applicant for working capital. The applicant disclosed these loans to Uganda Revenue Authority in an Associated Party Disclosure Notice. URA issued a withholding tax assessment of Shs. 912,934,373.58 on the interest. The applicant objected, arguing the loans were exempt under s.83(5) of the Income Tax Act as debentures widely issued outside Uganda, and that no interest had been paid. The applicant's financial statements and tax returns for 2014–2017 showed interest expensed as financial costs. URA issued third party agency notices freezing the applicant's bank accounts. The applicant claimed it had been loss-making since 2015 and unable to pay interest.
Issues
- Whether the applicant is liable to pay withholding tax on interest accrued or paid to a non-resident parent company.
- Whether interest paid on debentures issued by the applicant to Afgri Mauritius qualifies for exemption under s.83(5) of the Income Tax Act.
- Whether the debentures were 'widely issued' within the meaning of s.83(5)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
- Whether withholding tax is due when interest accrues or only when it is paid.
- Whether the applicant actually paid interest to Afgri Mauritius during the relevant period.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (17)
- Income Tax Act s.2
- Income Tax Act s.2(kk)
- Income Tax Act s.2(r)
- Income Tax Act s.2(xx)
- Income Tax Act s.47
- Income Tax Act s.47(1)
- Income Tax Act s.47(2)
- Income Tax Act s.79
- Income Tax Act s.79(k)
- Income Tax Act s.83
- Income Tax Act s.83(1)
- Income Tax Act s.83(5)
- Income Tax Act s.83(5)(a)
- Income Tax Act s.83(5)(b)
- Income Tax Act s.83(5)(c)
- Income Tax Act s.120
- Tax Appeals Tribunal Act s.21(6)
Cases cited (4)
- Kabandize John Baptist and 21 Others v KCCA (Civil Appeal No. 36 of 2016)
- Kenya Revenue Authority v Republic (Ex parte: Fintel Ltd.) (Civil Appeal No. 311 of 2013)
- Cooper Motors v Uganda Revenue Authority (TAT Application No. 67 of 2018)
- ATC Uganda Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (TAT Application No. 17 of 2019)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.