Wakilii

Nile Breweries Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 2780 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 88 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending appeal from Tax Appeals Tribunal decision
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed; applicant must comply with Tax Appeals Tribunal order pending appeal determination

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 High Court dismissed an application for stay of execution pending appeal from a Tax Appeals Tribunal decision. While the applicant satisfied three of five mandatory grounds—filing a notice of appeal, acting without unreasonable delay, and demonstrating imminent threat of execution through agency notices—the court held that the applicant failed to prove substantial loss with cogent evidence and failed to provide security for due performance of the decree. The court ruled that payment of 30% of assessed tax as a deposit pending objection determination could not be considered security for due performance, which is a mandatory requirement under the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed; applicant must comply with Tax Appeals Tribunal order pending appeal determination

Facts

Nile Breweries Limited manufactures alcoholic beverages including beer for export through export agents Kabaco Uganda Ltd and Ituri Investments Limited to South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo. On 19 March 2024 and 22 August 2022, Uganda Revenue Authority raised assessments totaling UGX 18,509,052,729 (VAT of UGX 8,043,093,350 and Local Excise Duty of UGX 10,465,959,379) for January to November 2022, alleging misclassification of local sales to the export agents as exports. The applicant objected on 22 March 2024, asserting the entities were export agents, not local purchasers. URA disallowed the objections on 30 April and 11 June 2024. The Tax Appeals Tribunal dismissed the applicant's review application on 21 November 2025. The applicant filed a notice of appeal on 24 November 2025 and this stay application on 27 November 2025. URA issued a demand letter threatening agency notices against the applicant's bankers. The applicant had paid 30% of the assessed amount (UGX 5,552,715,819) as a deposit pending objection determination.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant has sufficient grounds for the orders sought for stay of execution
  2. What remedies are available to the parties

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Stay of Execution — Five Mandatory Grounds
For an order of stay of execution pending appeal to be granted, an applicant must satisfy five mandatory grounds: (1) a notice of appeal has been filed; (2) the application has been made without unreasonable delay; (3) there is serious or imminent threat of execution if the application is not granted; (4) substantial loss may occur to the applicant unless stay is granted; and (5) the applicant has given security for due performance of the decree as may ultimately be binding upon him.
Tax Appeals — Imminent Threat of Execution Through Agency Notices
Where Uganda Revenue Authority has issued a demand notice and has statutory power to issue agency notices enforceable against a taxpayer's bankers without recourse to court, this constitutes imminent threat of execution for purposes of a stay application, even where formal execution proceedings have not yet commenced.
Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss Must Be Proved by Cogent Evidence
Substantial loss is a qualitative concept referring to any loss, great or small, that is of real worth or value, as distinguished from a loss without value or merely nominal loss. However, an applicant's assertion of substantial loss must be backed by cogent evidence such as books of accounts; mere assertion without supporting documentation is insufficient.
Tax Appeals — Security for Due Performance Distinguished from Statutory Deposit
Payment of 30% of assessed tax as a deposit pending determination of an objection under the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act cannot be considered as security for due performance of a decree for purposes of a stay application. Security for due performance is a mandatory requirement distinct from statutory deposits made during the objection process.
Stay of Execution — Failure to Satisfy All Mandatory Grounds
Where an applicant fails to satisfy all five mandatory grounds for stay of execution, the application must be dismissed even if some grounds are established. The grounds are cumulative, not alternative.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (8)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nile Breweries Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 2780 of 2025) [2026] UGCommC 88 (9 March 2026)
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.