The applicant seeks leave to appeal. At the hearing of the pre-trial conference in this matter, the applicant made an application to amend its plea (applicant is the defendant in the main matter.) I dismissed the application on 14 September 2018. On 21 September 2018 parties appeared before me for continuation of the pre-trial conference, the applicant then made an oral application for leave to appeal.
This is a matter that has taken a couple of turns and twists that have hindered its proper resolution on the merits. This is the second time parties intend to go on appeal to... More
1. This case concerns the validity of tax assessments.
2. The applicant is a company registered in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe. The respondent is the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority [ZIMRA], a statutory body established in terms of s 3 of the Revenue Authority Act [Chapter 23:11], tasked with the administration and collection of revenues due in terms of various taxing statutes including the Income Tax Act [Chapter 23:06], [the Act]. The applicant approached the court on an urgent basis seeking an order on the following terms:
“FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause why an order should not be... More
This is an urgent chamber application in which the applicant seeks a provisional order for the suspension of a garnishee placed by the respondent pursuant to an income tax assessment. More
The fall out between the parties centres on the jurisdiction of the taxing authority to issue additional assessments against the applicant. The applicant seeks an order setting aside notices of assessment issued by the respondent. This dispute pits the applicant, a taxpayer and the respondent, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority, (ZIMRA), an administrative authority created in terms of the Revenue Authority Act [Chapter 23:11], tasked with the obligation to collect taxes under the Income Tax Act [Chapter 23: 06], the Act. What started the wrangle between the parties is a tax assessment for the year ended 2019 which the applicant objected to.... More
Sometime in 1988 and 1994, the parties entered into a written retirement annuity policy namely number 7097386 and 7262909. In terms of the policy, the defendant undertook to pay monthly annuities to the plaintiff upon his retirement. Thereafter, the plaintiff advised the defendant of his retirement and demanded payment of monthly annuities as per the agreement.
The late Joshua Bechowitz Weller after consulting “experts” demanded monthly annuities of USD481.22 and USD61.26 respectively from policy number 7097386 and from policy number 7262909 effective from 1 April 2013 payable in arrears. Plaintiff has duly complied with his obligations under the respective policies... More
