Uganda Revenue Authority v Prof.Emmanuel Tumusiime Mutebile & 7 Others (Trustees of Bank of Uganda) (Civil Appeal 89 of 2021)
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 the appeal and affirmed the Tax Appeals Tribunal's finding that the Bank of Uganda Defined Benefit Scheme is a settlor trust under Income Tax Act s.70(f)(ii) because Bank of Uganda has a reversionary interest in the trust corpus at termination. The court held that tax liability for a settlor trust shifts to the settlor under s.71(5), not the trustees. The court found TAT had not determined whether the Scheme was tax exempt and declined to exercise original jurisdiction on that unaddressed issue.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to Respondent; Tax Appeals Tribunal decision affirmed
Facts
The Respondents are trustees of the Bank of Uganda Defined Benefit Scheme, a licensed retirement fund established to provide pensions to Bank of Uganda employees. The Scheme applied for a private ruling on its tax status, arguing it was a settlor trust whose income should be taxable to Bank of Uganda (the settlor), which is tax exempt. URA issued a ruling that the Scheme was a retirement fund taxable under s.8(4) of the Income Tax Act and raised assessments totaling UGX 106,162,667 for years 2010-2016. The Scheme objected and appealed to the Tax Appeals Tribunal, which held the Scheme was a settlor trust under s.70(f) because Bank of Uganda had a reversionary interest in surplus funds at termination. The Tribunal held tax liability shifted to the settlor under s.71(5). URA appealed to the High Court, abandoning one ground at hearing.
Issues
- Whether TAT erred in law in holding that the Scheme is a settlor trust.
- Whether TAT erred in law in holding that the income of the trust is exempt from income tax.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Decision of the Tax Appeals Tribunal affirmed.
- Costs awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.2(III)
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.8
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.8(4)
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.70(f)
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.71
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.71(1)
- Income Tax Act Cap 340 s.71(5)
- Uganda Retirement Benefits Regulatory Authority Act 2011
- Tax Appeals Tribunal Act Cap 345 s.14
- Tax Appeals Tribunal Act s.27
Cases cited (1)
- Uganda Revenue Authority v Rabbo Enterprises (U) Ltd and Another (SCCA No. 12 of 2004)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.