In dismissing a KRA private ruling a taxpayer relied on, the High Court has held it is only bound only by the tax laws and its duty is to interpret and enforce the law as enacted by Parliament. It cannot be legally prevented from interpreting a tax law due to a private ruling.

The HC has held that decisions communicated by the KRA even if based on ministerial approval are appealable under the TPA. Per the HC, appealable decisions include any final determination under a tax law that affects taxpayer rights even if not a formal assessment.

The TAT has ruled that taxing a property's entire disposal proceeds for CGT is unlawful and excessive. Even when taxpayer fail to provide any documents, KRA must still use its "best judgment" to reasonably estimate costs and calculate the net gain for CGT.

This is a major win for taxpayer rights, emphasising that the KRA's obligation to communicate a tax objection decision is mandatory, not optional.This is a critical precedent: always ensure your iTax details are correct, and be vigilant about KRA communication.

The HC has held that if the KRA sends their objection decision to an incorrect or non-iTax email address (failing to follow Section 75 of the TPA), the service is legally ineffective and the tax decision void even if the decision was dated within the 60-day deadline.

The HC has held that the disposal of vehicle salvages is an integral part of the insurance business, flowing from the principles of indemnity and subrogation. It is, therefore, encompassed with the VAT exemption for insurance services @AKI_Kenya

Sendy was therefore liable for VAT on the entire customer payment, not just its commission. https://t.co/wptE4L6Uat

Sendy Limited was the principal supplier of the hired transport services since it had control over the service, customers interact solely with it’s app and brand, and it actually authorises and collects the payment on behalf of riders and clients don't chose riders.

The High Court has overturned a TAT ruling and upheld a 82 M tax claim against Sendy Limited and concluded it is liable for VAT on the entire customer payment, not just its commission. The HC focused not on the contracts with riders but on the commercial and economic realities.

You can have Ghana,Kenya, and Uganda high prices to continue to subsidize Nigerias' loss-making prices and expect to thrive. The whole Multichoice group will go down due to Nigeria price subsidy.

The High Court has faulted the TAT and reaffirmed that taxpayers cannot rely on non-tax laws to escape tax liability. A tobacco firm’s attempt to use the Tobacco Control Act to sidestep excise duty failed and the HC affirmed only tax statutes govern tax obligations.

The HC held only objections lodged and acknowledged on iTax within 30 days count. Sending physical docs or talking to your tax officer doesn’t preserve your rights. If it’s not on iTax, it’s not valid. The system timestamp is now the legal anchor.

In a boost to food security, the HC has dismissed KRA’s appeal to levy VAT on DK-20N Organic Fertilizer, affirming its exempt status. Widely used to enrich soil and restore degraded land, the ruling supports sustainable farming and affordable crop production. @wanguwamajani

The High Court dismisses two KRA cases, orders VAT refunds, affirming the destination principle: a service qualifies as exported if consumed outside Kenya, regardless of where it's performed. Consumption location not performance is the key determinant for VAT treatment.

The TAT rightly interpreted section 56 of the TPA Act. But taxpayers have also won big when they proved deposits were not business income. https://t.co/H3HtSnMbqH

Currently, the CS may, on the application by a manufacturer, grant the remission of excise duty at 80% with respect to beer made from sorghum, millet or cassava or any other agricultural produce grown in Kenya (Keg Beers) excluding barley(WhiteCap etc)

Spirit/Wines consumers are in for reduced prices after Kenya issued the Remission of Excise Duty Regulations, 2025. The draft expands the scope of excise duty remission to spirits, compounded spirits as well as ethyl alcohol as a by-product of distillation and wines.

Taxpayers when presenting the requested documents must actively prove their case with competent, relevant evidence as required by the TPA.The burden of proof lies squarely with the taxpayer and only with KRA if the taxpayer can prove the assessment is erroneous

The HC has overturned a TAT ruling and ruled the KRA is only duty bound to review the documents so provided by a Taxpayer if the documents prove the assessment is erroneous. It clarified that submitting paperwork alone isn’t enough in tax disputes.

The HC has held that in medicine customs classification disputes,the @KRACorporate must provide taxpayers with its lab analysis reports and rely on @ppbkenya definitions on whether a product is a medicine/medicament or not unless KRA presents valid, contrary scientific proof.