EATON TOWERS GHANALTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER-GENERAL [GRA] AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2018]DLHC7537

EATON TOWERS GHANALTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER-GENERAL [GRA] AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERA... [2018]DLHC7537

Date	2018-02-27
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/TAX/0003/18
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC7537

JEROME NOBLE-NKRUMAH JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

DOMINIC QUASHIGAH FOR KIZITA MENSAH FOR THE APPELLANT

MAXWELL OWUSU BOADI FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT

[2018]DLHC7537
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >EATON TOWERS
GHANALTD<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE COMMISSIONER-GENERAL [GRA] AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERRCIAL DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT
NO. CM/TAX/0003/18&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 27TH FEBRUARY, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:
<o:p></o:p>DOMINIC
QUASHIGAH FOR KIZITA MENSAH FOR THE APPELLANT <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

MAXWELL
OWUSU BOADI FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

JEROME
NOBLE-NKRUMAH JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div>Tax Appeal – Commissioner Generals Re-characterization
of arrangements aimed at reducing tax due<o:p></o:p>Following a tax audit embarked upon by
the Commissioner General [CG] of the Ghana Revenue Authority [GRA] on the Appellants
business, this Appeal has arisen.&nbsp; This
audit covering the period 2013 to 2016 culminated in the upward adjustment of
the Appellants assessable income from its Vodafone operations and consequently
its direct and indirect tax liabilities for the period.<o:p></o:p>The Commissioner General set off tax
credits standing in favor of the Appellant in the aggregate amount of GHC9,431,605.18
against the the
assessed tax of GHC40,945,696.83 leaving an outstanding tax amount of GHC31,514,091.65.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied with this assessment the Appellant
wrote to the CG on 6th December 2017 and in accordance with section 42(5) (b) of Act 915 requested
a waiver of the&nbsp; required upfront payment
of 30% of the tax assessed which is a pre requisite for its assessment. This request
was repeated on the 27th of December 2017, this time notifying the
GRA of its objection to the tax decision in its letter dated 30th
November 2017.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Pursuant
to section 42(5) (a) of the Revenue
Administration Act 2016 (Act 915) the Appellant on 2nd January
2018 paid an amount of GHC9, 454,227. 45 being 30% of the outstanding tax
assessment in order to have the CG entertain its objection. After 60 days when
the Commissioner General had remained silent over the Appellants objection, the
Appellant &nbsp;by letter dated 14th
March 2018 treated the silence as rejection of its tax objection and hence this
Appeal.<o:p></o:p>This notice of Appeal filed on the 10th
of April 2018 is founded on two main grounds <o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
Commissioner Generals finding that the prices charged to Vodafone are ridiculously lower than prices paid by other
telecommunications operators is not supported by the facts presented to him
by the Appellant in support of its objection<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
commissioner General erred when he failed in his tax decision as is required of
him under section 99 of the revenue Administration Act , 2016 Act 915 to<o:p></o:p>i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</main>