Dodoma. The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Tanga Cement PLC, affirming an earlier decision that barred the company from relying on documents that were never submitted to the Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) during the objection stage of a tax dispute.
In a judgment delivered last week, a panel of three justices — Judges R. J. Kerefu, G. J. Mdemu and L. A. Mansoor — upheld the findings of the Tax Revenue Appeals Tribunal (TRAT), which ruled that the Tax Revenue Appeals Board (TRAB) erred in admitting a set of documents marked as Exhibit A-6.
The documents had been used by Tanga Cement to challenge TRA’s Pay-As-You-Earn (PAYE) assessment for 2016–2018.
TRA had in June 2020 issued a PAYE certificate demanding over Sh181 million. Tanga Cement objected to the assessment, arguing that TRA had wrongly treated housing benefits, failed to deduct employees’ pension contributions, and miscalculated late payment interest. TRA rejected the objection, prompting the company to appeal to TRAB.
TRAB partly ruled in favour of Tanga Cement after admitting the disputed documents — mainly email correspondence and payroll reports — as evidence.
TRA challenged the decision before the TRAT, arguing that the documents had never been submitted as required under Section 51(5) and (6) of the Tax Administration Act (TAA).
The TRAT agreed, holding that TRAB violated procedural rules by admitting evidence that was not furnished to the Commissioner General during the objection process.
In its final ruling, the Court of Appeal fully backed the TRAT’s position.
Documents must be filed at the objection stage
The Court emphasised that tax law strictly requires taxpayers to submit all documents they intend to rely on when lodging an objection with the Commissioner General.
Failure to do so bars them from later introducing new evidence at the appellate stages unless they first obtain leave from TRAB — something Tanga Cement did not do.
The justices described Section 51(5) and (6) of the TAA as “crystal clear,” stating that a taxpayer must comply at the earliest stage because “a tax dispute begins when the taxpayer objects to a tax decision.”
The Court further rejected Tanga Cement’s argument that the documents were provided during TRA’s audit and therefore should be admissible.
The Justices held that documents exchanged during an audit cannot replace the mandatory requirement to attach evidence at the objection stage.
A review of TRA’s final objection determination also showed no reference to the documents, disproving the company’s claim that the Commissioner General had relied on them.
With these findings, the Court concluded that TRAB had acted outside the law by admitting the documents, and upheld the TRAT ruling that nullified the earlier relief granted to Tanga Cement.
The appeal was dismissed in its entirety, with costs awarded to TRA.
Register to begin your journey to our premium contentSubscribe for full access to premium content
