A construction-sector company has lost its appeal against the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) after the Tax Appeals Tribunal struck out its case over late filing.
In its judgment, the tribunal ruled that Cedar Marketing and Communications Limited had failed to comply with the mandatory 30-day period for filing an appeal and had not sought permission to file its appeal out of time.
The dispute began after the Commissioner of Domestic Taxes issued a VAT additional assessment of Sh1,300,136.16 on August 30, 2022.
Cedar Marketing objected to the assessment on September 23, 2022.
On October 22, 2022, the Commissioner issued an Objection Decision.
Under the law, Cedar Marketing had until November 22, 2022, to file a Notice of Appeal.
Instead, the company filed the notice on October 29, 2025, more than three years later and without applying for an extension of time.
Cedar Marketing argued that the Commissioner had wrongly disallowed expenses it had incurred.
The company said it pays for jobs in small amounts, later grouping the payments by location and obtaining a single purchase invoice to cover them.
It contended that the additional assessment was "punitive and unfair" because the tax authority assumed it had incurred no costs during normal operations.
The company asked the tribunal to annul and set aside the Objection Decision and award it costs.
KRA defended the assessment, stating that the company had provided purchase invoices and electronic receipts but had failed to provide delivery notes and proof of payment as required.
KRA also argued that the appeal had been lodged outside the statutory period and was therefore invalid.
The Commissioner argued that the company had not complied with Section 13 of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act or the tribunal's procedural rules and that the tribunal therefore lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.
The tribunal, chaired by Erick Komolo, agreed that the appeal had been filed outside the statutory period.
It noted that Section 13(3) of the Act allows taxpayers to seek leave to appeal out of time, but Cedar Marketing had not done so.
The tribunal cited the principle that a court cannot proceed without jurisdiction.
It found that the company had "ignored the statutes to its detriment".
Because the appeal was incompetent, the tribunal declined to consider whether the tax assessment was justified, saying the issue had been rendered moot.
The tribunal struck out the appeal and made no order as to costs.
