CATEGORIES
- (1) Negotiating Tax Debt and Payment Arrangements with SARS
- (34)Accounting
- (1)Accounting for Income Tax
- (2)Accounting for Income Tax
- (8)Administration of Estates
- (1)Advisory Services
- (1)Application of tax rates, s6(2) rebates
- (1)Assessed losses
- (4)Audit, Reviews & Other Services
- (9)Blogs
- (8)Capital Gains Tax
- (1)Capital Gains Tax - Individuals Tax
- (1)Capital Gains Tax Implications of Trusts
- (2)Case study: Home office expense
- (1)Case study: Travel allowances
- (1)Company Formations
- (1)Compliance
- (123)Corporate Tax
- (9)Customs and Excise
- (2)Deceased Estate
- (1)Deductions Pre-trade and prepaid expenses
- (1)Deregistration
- (2)Employer and Employee (PAYE and UIF Specific)
- (1)Estate Duty
- (1)Events / Webinars
- (10)Faculty News
- (2)Farming
- (152)Individuals Tax
- (1)Input - Customs Duty
- (3)Interest
- (13)International Tax
- (17)Legislation
- (1)Low interest rate loans and loan subsidies
- (1)Nature of the rights of beneficiaries
- (1)Notional input tax
- (9)Payroll
- (2)Practical Payroll
- (2)Provisional tax (Link with other Taxes)
- (2)SARS Dispute Resolution
- (4)SARS Issues
- (1)Salaried Employees
- (135)Tax Administration
- (2)Tax Administration Part 2B: Resolving Problems with SARS using the Tax Ombud
- (1)Tax Administration Part 3B Dispute Resolution - Objection and appeal
- (3)Tax Update
- (1)Tax implications of loans to trusts
- (1)Tax residence
- (1)Tax returns and payments
- (2)Transfer-Pricing
- (1)Trust Income / Gain Allocations
- (1)Trust types and income allocations
- (6)Trusts
- (72)VAT
- (3)VAT periods
- (1)Wear and tear allowances
- (1)Wills, Estates & Trusts
- (1)Zero Rated
- (1)eFiling
- Show All
SARS Must Comply with its Interpretation Notes: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Medtronic International Trading S.A.R.L
- 11 March 2023
- SARS Issues
- The Tax Faculty
On 3 March 2023, the Supreme Court of Appeal in Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Medtronic International Trading SARL [2023] ZASCA 20 upheld the principle that the South African Revenue Service (SARS) must follow its own Interpretation Notes.
At para 10 of the judgment, Goosen AJ emphasized that SARS cannot deny the binding nature of Interpretation Notes. The Tax Administration Act defines "practice generally prevailing" as a practice outlined in an official publication, which includes Interpretation Notes. In Marshall and Others v Commissioner, South Africa Revenue Service 2019 (6) 246 (CC), the Constitutional Court established the importance of consistent interpretation of tax legislation by those responsible for its administration. Therefore, when SARS evaluates a taxpayer based on a "practice generally prevailing," it must apply its interpretation and application of the law consistently and cannot deviate from a prevailing practice.
Click here to access the judgment.
0 COMMENTS
There are not comments for this article at the moment, check back later.
LEAVE A COMMENT
You must be logged in to add a comment, log in now.