By Andrew Kariuki
The Tax Appeals Tribunal has struck out an application by Milele Tents Limited seeking leave to file a tax appeal out of time and to halt enforcement measures by the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA).
In a ruling delivered on December 5, 2025, the Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant the orders sought by the company, noting that the application was fundamentally misplaced in law.
Milele Tents had moved the tribunal challenging what it described as the Commissioner of Micro and Small Taxpayers’ failure to issue an objection decision on a tax assessment of Ksh 12.27 million.
The company also sought a stay of execution against a Notice of Intention to add it to the VAT Special Table, issued on September 26, 2025.
However, the Commissioner opposed the application, stating that an objection decision had in fact been issued on March 26, 2025 and communicated to the taxpayer through its registered i-Tax email address and that of its tax agent.
The Commissioner argued that the statutory 30-day period for filing an appeal had lapsed and that the applicant had failed to demonstrate any valid grounds for extension of time.
In its analysis, the Tribunal emphasized that the tax appeal process is strictly governed by statute, particularly Section 51 of the Tax Procedures Act and Section 13 of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Act.
It held that there is no legal basis for granting “leave” to file a Notice of Appeal, as the law already prescribes mandatory timelines.
The Tribunal further found that while it has limited power to extend time in specific circumstances—such as illness or absence from the country—the applicant had not applied for such extension nor provided evidence to justify the delay.
On the request to stay the VAT Special Table process, the Tribunal ruled that it could not issue anticipatory or speculative orders.
It held that placement on the VAT Special Table is an internal administrative mechanism and does not constitute an appealable tax decision unless and until it crystallizes into a formal assessment.
“The Tribunal cannot interfere with internal administrative processes unless they give rise to an appealable tax decision,” the ruling stated.
As a result, the Tribunal struck out the application in its entirety and made no order as to costs.
