Menu

© Firu Africa, 2026. All rights reserved.

Ericsson Kenya Limited vs. Attorney General and Others Nairobi Petition No. 506 of 2013[2013]eKLR,

Refund Claims

the Court considered the responsibility of the Commissioner under the Act in light of the Constitution, “[49] Whether the respondents acted in accordance with Article 47 of the Constitution is a question of fact which calls for an examination of the circumstances under which the petitioner’s refund claims were dealt with. The Court is not concerned with whether the petitioner is entitled to the amount but whether the process afforded was one that complied with the dictates of Article 47 of the Constitution. In considering the circumstances, it is important to recall that the fact that a taxpayer has lodged a refund claim in accordance with the VAT Act and regulations does not discharge the respondents from the responsibility of examining the claim and confirming that it meets the requirements of the law. The Commissioner, when processing the claim, is not merely a conveyor belt performing a perfunctory exercise. He is required to examine and verify the claim and where irregularities, fraud or other deficiencies are discovered draw the petitioner’s attention to them. The Commissioner is also entitled to call for further information, if necessary, to satisfy himself that the claim meets the legal threshold for payment. Ultimately, the Commissioner is entitled to reject a VAT refund claim by giving written reasons which would entitle the taxpayer to appeal or challenge the...

Resource Information
Author
Firu
Category
Litigation Corner, Pleading Aids
Firu Africa

Need Help?

Send us an email for tax, account issues and so on.

Contact Us