Wakilii

Easy Save Supermarket Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 3 of 2022)

Tribunal · [2023] UGTAT 55 · 2023 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application challenging imposition of penal tax arising from failure to use Electronic Fiscal Receipting and Invoicing Solution (EFRIS)
Decision
Application dismissed for failure to comply with mandatory pre-filing requirement

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 Tax Appeals Tribunal dismissed the application on the preliminary ground that the applicant failed to deposit 30% of the tax in dispute as required by s.15 of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act. The tribunal held that this requirement is mandatory and that the applicant's admission of non-payment rendered the application not properly before the tribunal. The tribunal did not reach the substantive merits of the penal tax assessment.

Outcome

Application dismissed for failure to comply with mandatory pre-filing requirement

Facts

Easy Save Supermarket Limited operates a supermarket in Zana, Entebbe Road. Uganda Revenue Authority introduced the Electronic Fiscal Receipting and Invoicing Solution (EFRIS) with implementation beginning 18 November 2021. The applicant engaged Lotus Technologies Ltd, an accredited EFRIS software integrator, to assist with integration. The applicant experienced delays in integration due to system failures, the integrator being overwhelmed with clients, and delayed responses from URA. Between 18 November and 14 November 2021, the applicant continued to issue manual receipts as it could not activate EFRIS. URA issued two VAT penal assessments totalling Shs. 84,000,000 for the period 15 November to 14 November 2021 for failure to issue fiscalised invoices. The applicant's objection was disallowed. The applicant admitted it had not paid 30% of the tax in dispute due to challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant is liable to pay penal tax of Shs. 84,000,000 assessed for failure to use EFRIS.
  2. Whether the applicant complied with the mandatory requirement under s.15 of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act to deposit 30% of the tax in dispute before lodging the application.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Tax Law — Tax Appeals Tribunal — Mandatory Pre-Filing Requirement — Payment of 30% of Tax in Dispute
Section 15 of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act requires an applicant to deposit at least 30% of the tax assessed before lodging an application for review. This requirement is mandatory and failure to comply renders the application not properly before the tribunal.
Administrative Law — Preliminary Objections — Timing — Mandatory Requirements
A preliminary objection can be raised at any point during the trial. Where the objection concerns a mandatory statutory requirement and if successful would dispose of the matter, the tribunal must determine it before addressing the substantive merits.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (7)

  • Embassy Supermarket (U) Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. 114 of 2021)
  • Attorney General v Bugisu Coffee Marketing Association Limited [1963] EA 38
  • Uganda Projects Implementation and Management Centre v Uganda Revenue Authority (Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 1999)
  • Elgon Electronic v Uganda Revenue Authority (HCCA No. 11 of 2007)
  • Mukisa Biscuit Company Ltd v West End Distributors [1969] EA 896
  • Bullion Refinery Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application No. 36 of 2021)
  • Samuel Mayanja v Uganda Revenue Authority (HCT-00-CC-MC-0017-2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Easy Save Supermarket Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Application 3 of 2022) 2023 UGTAT 55 (28 September 2023)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.