Brothers sue SARS for R900m
The failure of the SARS to investigate a report of an eFiling profile hack could prove costly, as it is now facing a R900m damages claim.
A Sunday Times report says instead of investigating complaints by construction company Mol Pro Consulting, SARS charged the company’s directors, brothers Tumelo (54) and Khothatso Moletsane (49), with tax fraud to the tune of R116m.
After three years and two months, during which the Moletsanes appeared in court more than 20 times, the NPA dropped charges in February – after the company made representations proving that SARS withheld an internal report that confirmed their profile hacking claims.
In their summons, Mol Pro and the Moletsanes are claiming financial compensation comprising R50m the company is owed by government departments for projects that have already been completed but cannot be paid because the company’s tax clearance certificate was withdrawn; R690m for loss of income since the hack five years ago; R20m in financial losses related to the forced selling of Mol Pro’s assets; and R100m damages sought by the Moletsane brothers for loss of income and personal assets over the five years.
The brothers are also seeking an additional R75m for legal fees and reputational damage of having their names linked to criminal charges in the press, and arriving in court bound in handcuffs and shackles on their legs, giving the impression that they are dangerous criminals.
The Sunday Times report says they also accused a SARS investigator of trying to influence an earlier audit by SARS into Mol Pro by asking the auditor involved to change her report, and acting outside her authority to target the company.
They also accused SARS officials of concealing the fact that its anticorruption unit had confirmed the existence of a syndicate of ex-SARS employees who sought to extort companies by changing the information on their eFiling profiles, which would attract a SARS audit.
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.