Top court dismisses Sasol Chevron appeal bid
The Constitutional Court has dismissed an appeal application brought by Sasol Chevron in its drawn-out dispute with SARS over a VAT refund, reports BusinessLIVE.
The apex court yesterday found that the joint venture failed to bring its review application within the period of 180 days as prescribed by the law.
The dispute between the tax agency and the joint venture emanates from transactions that took place in 2014 when it bought certain movable goods from Sasol Catalyst, a division of Sasol Chemical Industries, for export to Nigeria from SA.
The unspecified goods were delivered by Sasol Catalyst to a warehouse at the Durban Harbour, where they were sold to Sasol Chevron and then immediately on-sold to the Escravos Gas-to-Liquids Project for export to Nigeria.
SA’s tax laws require that goods sold for export must be shipped within 90 days of the date of sale.
Sasol Catalyst, the seller of the goods, elected as the vendor to supply the goods to Sasol Chevron and levy tax at the zero rate in terms of the VAT Act.
The relevant tax invoices for the sale of the goods were dated 20 August 2014, 22 September 2014 and 22 October 2014.
However, the joint venture did not export the goods within 90 days of the date of the tax invoice as required by law and the goods were ultimately shipped on 24 April 2015.
Sasol Catalyst on 30 January 2015 applied to SARS for an extension of the prescribed 90-day period.
In anticipation that the request would be accepted, Sasol Catalyst issued new and revised tax invoices in substitution of those previously issued in August, September, October, November and December 2014 in which VAT was levied at the standard rate of 14% that was operational at the time.
Sasol Chevron accordingly paid the VAT levied by Sasol Catalyst.
SARS later responded to Sasol Catalyst’s request and declined the application for an extension, making it clear it wasn’t prepared to budge and that Sasol Chevron wasn’t entitled to a VAT refund.
Sasol Chevron successfully approached the High Court for an order to review and set aside SARS’ decision, but that was overruled on appeal at the SCA, a decision which has now been endorsed by the apex court.
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.
