Yogi Steels Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority
Tax Appeals Tribunal, Application No. 224 of 2024. July to December 2025. Coram: Ms. Crystal Kabajwara; Mrs. Stella Nyapendi Chombo; Ms. Grace Safi.
Duty Remission · Revocation of Duty Remission · Legitimate Expectation
A steel maker bought wire rods relying on a 12-month duty remission. Two weeks later the remission was revoked, without a word of explanation.
The situation
A steel maker held a duty remission for 15,000 tonnes of wire rods for FY2023/24. On 1 April 2024 it bought 528 tonnes. The remission was revoked by a legal notice of 15 April 2024 that gave no reasons, and the company learned of it only at entry in June; competitors kept theirs.
How it was resolved
The Tribunal held the revocation unlawful. The regulations require reasons to be communicated, and none were; there was no evidence any condition had been breached; a 12-month grant created a legitimate expectation for the full period; and treating competitors differently was an abuse of discretion. The consignment was entitled to remission and the 30% security paid was to be refunded.
What a practitioner takes from it
A remission granted for a period can be relied on for that period unless reasons for revoking it are given.