Lawyer Tom Ojienda’s bid to get another term as a member of the JSC is in limbo after the Kenya Revenue Authority declined to issue him with a tax compliance certificate.
KRA said it could not do so because of an outstanding tax dispute.
The certificate is a requirement for those seeking to represent the Law Society of Kenya in the Judicial Service Commission. Ojienda is seeking another term.
In an affidavit filed in court, KRA officer Rael Ivayo says for the certificate to be issued, they have to establish Ojienda’s tax compliance.
“Where there is an outstanding tax dispute, a tax compliance certificate cannot be issued as it would be a self-defeating exercise on KRA’s part,” a court document reads.
Ojienda sued the authority to have it compelled to issue him with a certificate for 2018-19. He said KRA’s actions are malicious and deliberately calculated to ensure he is locked out of the nomination of the Law Society of Kenya representative to the Judicial Service Commission — a race to be concluded on December 10.
But KRA says issuing Ojienda with the certificate for the sole reason of seeking nomination without actual compliance would amount to treating him favourably compared to other taxpayers.
“It’s not true that failure by KRA to issue a tax compliance certificate is coincidental to or meant to interfere with Ojienda’s application as the LSK male nominee to the Judicial Service Commission,” Ivayo says.
Read:
According to KRA, the orders sought by Ojienda are only meant to restrain and stop it from undertaking its statutory mandate as provided for by the Income Tax Act and the Tax Procedures Act. It has urged the court to dismiss the application.
The LSK has been listed as a party to the case. It will make its arguments tomorrow when the matter will be heard.
Ojienda maintains that the application for issuance of tax compliance certificate for 2018 was “maliciously, irrationally and in a calculated manner” rejected based on assessments for the years 2009-14 quashed by Justice George Odunga.
In court documents, he says that sometimes in September 2016, KRA served a notice requiring him to pay Sh378 million arrived at after illegal amendments to his tax register and insertion of fictitious figures derived from clients’ deposits and personal emoluments between 2009 and 2016.
Ojienda sought to quash the assessment dated September 5, 2016, which demanded from him Sh378 million.
Judge Odunga heard the application, quashed the assessments and prohibited KRA from acting upon them. But KRA says the court did not stop it from determining Ojienda’s tax liability for the period.
But KRA says whereas the court quashed and prohibited it from demanding shs 378 million, the court did not stop them from determining Ojienda’s tax liability for the period 2009 to 2016.