Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 JULY 2019

Tax In Brief | Issue 31

the taxpayer disputed, inter alia, the correctness of additional estimated assessments issued by SARS.

South AfricaTax

High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Johannesburg | Wingate-Pearse v C:SARS & Others

  • the taxpayer disputed, inter alia, the correctness of additional estimated assessments issued by SARS.
  • the taxpayer's argument that the additional assessments ought to be set aside on the basis that he was investigated by the SARS' High Risk Investigation Unit ("HRIU") ("rogue unit") and that the operations of the HRIU infringed his constitutionally protected rights, considered.
  • the application of the Plascon-Evans rule in these motion proceedings and the effect thereof on the alleged operations of the HRIU, considered.
  • whether a declaratory order that the establishment by SARS of the HRIU was without statutory authority, unlawful, inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 and invalid, would lead to the conclusion that all information gathered by the HRIU had been obtained illegally and therefore could not be used by an organ of

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from