Revenue Appeals Tribunal e-Library
Welcome to the e-Library, your one-stop-shop for tax dispute resources: Discover, learn and stay updated with E-library
Resources:
- Judgements: formal decisions made by court of law or tax tribunal.
- Legislation: Laws and regulations created by government or legislation body.
- eBooks: Digital versions of printed books.
- Online databases: Digital collections of scholarly research materials i.e. research articles, conference proceedings.
- Website & Portals: Online platforms providing access to decisions from other tax tribunals and tax related bodies/orgs.
Get Started:
Log in and explore the e-library. Let it be your tax research partner.
Communities in DSpace
Select a community to browse its collections.
Recent Submissions
The State Vs. Malawi Revenue Authority; EX-PARTE; Blantyre Printing and Publishing
(High Court of Malawi, Principal Registry., 2017-02-07) Honourable Justice Joseph Chigona
This case concerns a judicial review application challenging the enforcement of alleged tax liabilities by the Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA). Blantyre Printing and Publishing Company Limited sought review of the MRA’s decision to issue and enforce a distraint certificate for approximately MK 675.9 million, claimed to be due in respect of Value Added Tax, Corporate Tax, PAYE, Withholding Tax, and Fringe Benefit Tax.
The applicant did not dispute the tax assessment itself but challenged the legality and procedural propriety of the enforcement actions, alleging lack of reasonable notice, unlawful combination of different tax regimes in a single distraint certificate, and non-compliance with prescribed statutory procedures under the Taxation Act and the Value Added Tax Act.
The MRA raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the applicant had failed to exhaust alternative statutory remedies relating to tax assessments. The Court rejected this argument, holding that the dispute concerned the mode of enforcement, not the assessment of tax, and was therefore amenable to judicial review.
The Court further found that the issues raised were triable and that damages would not be an adequate remedy. Applying principles governing interlocutory injunctions, the Court held that the balance of convenience favoured the applicant and ordered the continuation of a stay and injunction to preserve the status quo pending determination of the substantive judicial review.
The State v Malawi Revenue Authority ex-parte Mike Appel and Gatto Limited
(High Court of Malawi, Principal Registry., 2025-01-29) Kenyatta Nyirenda, J.
The case concerns an application for judicial review arising from a tax dispute between the applicants, Mike Appel and Gatto Limited, and the Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA). Following tax investigations, the MRA assessed the applicants for substantial tax liabilities and issued a Notice of Intent to Distrain for immediate recovery. The applicants challenged the decision, arguing that the assessments were excessive, based on estimates, ignored applicable tax credits, and were enforced before objections and appeals were determined, thereby acting unreasonably and unfairly.
The MRA applied to have leave to commence judicial review vacated on the ground that the applicants had failed to exhaust the statutory tax appeal remedies provided under the Taxation Act and the Value Added Tax Act. The High Court examined the scope of judicial review in tax matters, the availability and adequacy of alternative statutory remedies, and whether the applicants had an arguable case. The Court held that the tax legislation provides clear appeal mechanisms, including appeals to the Commissioner General and further to the Resident Magistrate Court, with provisions for waiver of payment. Consequently, the matter was primarily a tax dispute for which statutory remedies should be pursued rather than judicial review, and the Court emphasised that judicial review should not be used to circumvent established tax appeal procedures.
The State v Malawi Revenue Authority, Ex Parte Imran Meman t/a Kamlisha Enterprises and Others
(High Court of Malawi, Principal Registry, 2014-08-08) Justicde M.A. Tembo
This case concerned an application for leave to appeal and a stay of execution following a High Court decision that discharged leave to apply for judicial review against a decision of the Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA). The original judicial review sought to challenge MRA’s decision to implement the mandatory use of Electronic Fiscal Devices (EFDs) for Value Added Tax (VAT) purposes with effect from 1 July 2014.
The Court held that the applicants had failed to apply for judicial review promptly and within the required statutory timeframe, and had further breached their duty of full and frank disclosure by making material misrepresentations when seeking leave ex parte. The Court rejected the argument that leave to appeal in civil matters is automatic, finding that such leave must satisfy statutory requirements under the Supreme Court of Appeal Act.
In refusing both leave to appeal and a stay of execution, the Court found that no sufficient reasons had been advanced to warrant appellate intervention, and that the alleged business losses arising from the EFD regime were speculative and unsubstantiated. The Court emphasized the public interest in effective tax administration and concluded that the applicants had failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying a stay.
The State v Malawi Revenue Authority and Mapeto (DWSM) Limited. Judicial Cause No. 84 of 2015
(High Court of Malawi, 2015-10-05) Hon. Justice H.S.B. Potani
This case concerned a tax dispute arising from a tax assessment issued by the Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA) against Mapeto (DWSM) Limited. The applicant commenced judicial review proceedings seeking to compel MRA to refer the disputed tax assessment to the Special Arbitrator, as provided for under Malawi’s tax appeal framework, after alleging that the Commissioner General had failed or refused to initiate the statutory appeal process.
MRA raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the judicial review proceedings were an abuse of the court process because a related matter involving the same parties and subject matter was already pending before the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The High Court examined whether the existence of the pending Supreme Court appeal barred the judicial review. The Court held that although both matters arose from the same tax assessment, the reliefs sought were materially different. The Supreme Court proceedings concerned interim relief (stay of enforcement of the tax assessment), whereas the judicial review sought to enforce MRA’s statutory duty to refer the tax dispute to the Special Arbitrator for substantive determination.
The Court concluded that the judicial review proceedings were not a duplication nor an abuse of court process. Consequently, the preliminary objection was dismissed, and directions were issued for the judicial review hearing to proceed, with costs awarded to the applicant.
The State Vs. Commissioner General of Malawi Revenue Authority. Ex-Parte; Ginners African Limited.
(High Court of Malawi, Principal Registry., 2013) Chirwa, J.
The case revolves around an application for judicial review filed by Ginners African Limited against the Commissioner General of the Malawi Revenue Authority. The applicant contested a penalty of K4, 378,420.00 imposed by the Respondent without giving the applicant an opportunity to be heard. The court evaluated the fairness of the decision-making process, emphasizing that judicial review focuses on the fairness of the treatment by the authority rather than the merits of the case. Ultimately, the court found the respondent's decision to be wednesbury unreasonable and quashed the penalty, allowing the applicant to bear the costs of the application.