Judgment summary
The Appellant, Elijah Momanyi Mogona, appealed against an Objection Decision dated 22nd September 2023 issued by the Commissioner of Domestic Taxes, which confirmed additional income and VAT assessments issued on 14th December 2021 and 30th September 2021 respectively.
The Appellant contended that the Objection Decision was issued outside the sixty (60) day statutory period and should therefore be deemed to have succeeded. The Respondent maintained that the objection was late and had not been properly regularised, and that the Objection Decision was issued within the statutory timeline.
The Tribunal found that the Appellant's objection application was filed on 26th July 2023, and the Objection Decision was issued on 22nd September 2023, within the sixty days prescribed under Section 51(4A) of the Tax Procedures Act. The Tribunal also found that the Appellant had not sufficiently supported his grounds for lodging a late objection, nor provided documentation to support his substantive grounds of objection, as required under Sections 51(3), 51(6) and 51(7) of the Tax Procedures Act.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that the burden of proof rested with the Appellant under Section 56(1) of the TPA and Section 30 of the TAT Act, and that this burden had not been discharged.
Background
The Appellant is an individual Kenyan taxpayer (para 1). The Respondent is the principal officer appointed under Section 13 of the Kenya Revenue Authority Act, responsible for tax collection and administration (para 2).
On 14th December 2021 and 30th September 2021, the Respondent issued the Appellant with additional income and VAT assessments (para 3). On 26th July 2023, the Appellant filed an Objection Application against these assessments (para 4, para 25).
On 22nd September 2023, the Respondent issued its Objection Decision confirming the additional assessments (para 5). Aggrieved, the Appellant lodged the Notice of Appeal dated 30th June 2025 (para 6).
Core dispute
The Appellant argued that the Respondent's Objection Decision was issued outside the sixty (60) day period allowed by law, and that because his objection was filed on 16th June 2022 (or, per the iTax system, 26th July 2022), the decision ought to have been made by 15th or 16th August 2022. He contended that the objection should be deemed to have succeeded due to the delay, and that the decision letter dated 22nd September 2023 never reached him (paras 9 to 13).
The Respondent contended that the decision was communicated to the Appellant's official email on 22nd September 2023, that it was a stranger to the Appellant's alleged Objection Application dated 25th May 2022 because it was never received, and that the Appellant had not provided satisfactory evidence to justify his late objection under Section 51(7) of the Tax Procedures Act. The Respondent further submitted that the Appellant failed to provide evidence to show the assessment was erroneous or excessive, and had not availed supporting documentation as required by Section 51(3) of the Tax Procedures Act (paras 16 to 20).
Court findings
The Tribunal identified two issues for determination: whether the Appeal is valid, and whether the Respondent's additional assessments are justified and proper in law (para 22).
On validity, the Tribunal found the uncontroverted evidence showed the Appellant filed his Objection Application on 26th July 2023, supported by an iTax acknowledgement receipt and email correspondence. The Respondent issued its Objection Decision on 22nd September 2023 and emailed it to the Appellant on 25th September 2023 (para 25). Applying Section 51(4A) of the Tax Procedures Act, the Tribunal held that the Respondent rendered the Objection Decision within the sixty day statutory timeline, and the Appellant's contrary contention could not stand. The Appeal was therefore held to be valid (paras 26 to 27).
On the justification for the additional assessments, the Tribunal noted the Respondent's findings that the Appellant failed to provide grounds of objection and supporting documents at the time of filing, did not meet the requirements of Section 51(3)(c) of the TPA 2015, and did not respond to emails dated 1st August 2023 and 4th September 2023 requesting regularisation of his objection (para 28).
The Tribunal found that the Appellant lodged his Late Objection Application on 26th July 2023 against the assessments of 30th September 2021, and that the Respondent had, by email of 8th January 2023, informed him of the lateness and invited regularisation under Section 51(7) of the Tax Procedures Act (para 29).
Applying Section 51(2), (6) and (7) of the Tax Procedures Act, the Tribunal found that the Appellant's stated ground for late objection, 'other reasonable cause, no response from earlier submitted docs', was broad and unsupported by any evidence of earlier submissions or documents justifying the delay (paras 30 to 31).
The Tribunal referred to Equity Group Holdings Limited vs Commissioner of Domestic Taxes [2021] eKLR on the consequences of a decision made outside 60 days, and to Commissioner of Investigations and Enforcement vs Kidero (Income Tax Appeal E028 of 2020) eKLR on the taxpayer's duty of full disclosure under the self-assessment regime (paras 32, 34).
The Tribunal held that the burden of proof rests with the Appellant under Section 56(1) of the Tax Procedures Act and Section 30 of the TAT Act, and found that the Appellant neither lodged his objection within statutory timelines nor sufficiently supported his grounds for late objection (paras 33 and 35).
Outcome
The Tribunal held that the Appeal lacks merit and dismissed it. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs (para 36).
Major issues / areas of contention
- Whether the Appeal is valid.
- Whether the Respondent's Additional Assessments of the Appellant are justified and proper in law.