This article is based on insights provided by Edwin Prosper (Partner), Catherine Mokiri (Associate), and Fredrickson Maboko (Tax Advisor), Bowmans, on a recent Court of Appeal decision clarifying taxpayers’ rights to challenge administrative omissions by the Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA).
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent Africa Tax Review.
Tanzania Court Confirms TRA Inaction Can Be Challenged in Tax Appeals. The Tanzania Court of Appeal has delivered a landmark ruling that expands taxpayer rights within the country’s tax dispute framework.
The decision clarifies that taxpayers are not limited to challenging formal decisions alone, but may also appeal administrative inaction by the Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA).
In this expert contribution, tax professionals from Bowmans analyse the implications of the ruling and what it means for tax compliance and enforcement in Tanzania.
Tanzania Court Confirms TRA Inaction Can Be Challenged in Tax Appeals: Overview of the Decision
On 4 February 2026, the Court of Appeal of Tanzania (CAT) delivered a landmark judgment in Civil Appeal No. 145 of 2022.
The Court held that the Tax Revenue Appeals Board (TRAB) and the Tax Revenue Appeals Tribunal (TRAT) have jurisdiction to hear appeals not only against formal objection decisions, but also against other decisions, including omissions by the Commissioner General.
This includes situations where the Commissioner General fails to determine a taxpayer’s application, such as a tax waiver request, within the prescribed statutory timeframe.|
The Court further clarified that judicial precedent cannot restrict jurisdiction that is expressly granted by statute.
The Facts of the Case
The dispute arose from a jeopardy income tax assessment issued by the Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) to a non-resident company, with the appellant alleged to be its local representative.
The appellant filed a notice of objection and applied for a waiver of the requirement to pay one-third of the assessed tax, which is typically required before an objection can be admitted.
However, the TRA rejected the waiver application after a delay, arguing that it had been submitted out of time.
The appellant appealed to the TRAB, maintaining that the waiver application was filed within the required period and that the TRA’s delayed response rendered the decision procedurally defective.
Decisions of the Lower Tribunals
Both the TRAB and the TRAT dismissed the appeal.
They held that only formal objection decisions are appealable and relied on earlier rulings involving Pan African Energy Tanzania Ltd.
In those cases, the Court of Appeal had indicated that waiver decisions are discretionary and do not give rise to objection decisions capable of being appealed.
SEE ALSO: Mauritius to Impose 15% VAT on Foreign Digital Service Providers from 2026
Key Issues Before the Court of Appeal
The Court of Appeal considered the following key issues:
- Whether the failure by the Commissioner General to determine a waiver application within the prescribed timeframe constitutes an appealable omission
- Whether the TRAB and TRAT were bound by earlier judicial decisions in the Pan African Energy cases
Legal Analysis by the Court
The Court held that, under section 53(1) of the Tax Administration Act (now section 64(1)), omissions by the TRA — including failure to act within statutory timelines — are capable of being challenged on appeal.
This confirms that taxpayers are not limited to appealing formal objection decisions.
The Court emphasised that statutory timelines imposed on the TRA are mandatory and form part of proper tax administration.
It criticised the delay by the TRA and noted that non-compliance with statutory timelines may undermine accountability in public administration.
Clarification on Previous Case Law
The Court clarified that its earlier decisions in the Pan African Energy cases were fact-specific and should not be interpreted as limiting the statutory jurisdiction of the TRAB.
It noted that in those earlier cases, the TRA had acted within the required timeframe.
By contrast, in the present case, the TRA’s delay in responding to the waiver application was a critical distinguishing factor.
Practical Implications for Taxpayers
The ruling has important implications for taxpayers and tax administration in Tanzania:
- Taxpayers may now challenge administrative inaction or delays by the TRA through the appeals process
- Statutory timelines imposed on the TRA are enforceable and carry practical significance
- While waiver decisions themselves remain non-appealable, delays in handling such applications may give rise to appealable omissions
- Taxpayers should closely monitor timelines applicable to applications and objections, as TRA inaction may now provide grounds for escalation
