Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTING
GROUP MEMBERS
NAME STUDENT NUMBER CLASS
1 Tonderayi Gwarazimba N0172285L Conventional
2 Brighton Moyo N0171327T Conventional
3 Chrispen Ncube N0173596V Conventional
4 Felicity Nsingo N0174109W Conventional
5 Tashinga Raura N0171491J Conventional
6 Courage Rwizi N0171945D Conventional
7 Mashal Marowa N0171766M Block Release
8 Vimbai Mupingo N0174670N Block Release
9 Kylie Nyamandi N0174439M Block Release
10 Tinotenda Nyamundanda N0174138E Block Release
QUESTION 1
- Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd should pay tax on a quarterly basis in advance of year end on 25 March,
25 June, 25 September and 20 December at 10%, 25%, 30% and 35% respectively of
estimated annual tax liability.
Working 1: Warehouse
Industrial Building Definition
- An industrial building is a building used mainly as a factory or for industrial purposes, to the
extent of least 50% of its floor area. It includes a building owned by a manufacturer and used
by him for storing his goods, that is, raw material, processed goods or work in progress or
finished goods.
Year Description $
2016 Cost 120 000
2017 Less: Special Wear & Tear 25% (30 000)
ITV at the end of 2017 90 000
2018 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (30 000)
ITV at the end of 2018 60 000
2019 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (30 000)
ITV at the end of 2019 30 000
2020 Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (30 000)
ITV at the end of 2020 -
- Section 15 (2) (a) of the Income Tax Act states that the deductions allowed to the taxpayer
shall be expenditure and losses to the extent to which they are incurred for the purposes of
trade or in the production of the income except to the extent to which they are expenditure or
losses of a capital nature.
Case Law
- As per Raltio and Variale v COT, two tax payers were in the letting business and the property
subject to letting developed cracks on the walls and were in a condition crying out for a
repair. The following expenses were incurred for which the tax payer claimed:
- Architectural fees
- Foundation underpinning
- Cutting down of a tree which proved a lightning threat to the property.
- Cutting down of tree roots which threatened the foundation
- Crack filling
It was held that all the expenses except crack filling were of a capital nature and hence were
disallowed for deductions, being a form of improvements. Where expenditure has been re-classified
as improvement it should be added back to net profit and instead be ranked for capital allowances.
- Section 15 (2) (b) of the Income Tax Act states that repairs to business assets used for the
production of income are deductible in full in the year incurred, in the hands of the taxpayer.
- As per Lurcott v Wakely & Wheeler, it was stated that, ‘Repair is restoration by renewal or
replacement of the subsidiary parts of a whole. Renewal as distinguished from repair, is
reconstruction of the entirety.’
- For a lease improvement to exist there has to be a legally enforceable obligation to improve
the premises in terms of the lease agreement.
- A lease agreement exists between Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd and the lessor. However, Tirivakundi
Pvt Ltd incurred costs in excess of what had been agreed in the lease agreement with the
lessor.
- The excess costs were not agreed upon thus they are deemed to be voluntary improvements
and they do not qualify for a deduction in terms of Section 15 (2) (e).
- However, capital allowances should be computed on improvements which did not rank for
lease improvements allowance (excess improvements) in the hands of Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd, as
the company is seeking to maximise tax advantages.
Date Description $
2016 Cost 62 600
2020 Wear and Tear (2.5% x 62 600) 1 565
- A commercial building is a building constructed on or after 1 April 1975 and is used to the
extent of at least 90% of its floor area for purposes of trade.
- Commercial buildings do not qualify for Special Initial Allowance unless if constructed at a
growth point.
- No information confirms that the commercial building is located at a growth point, therefore
Tirivakundi can claim Wear and Tear.
Date Description $
2017 Cost 150 000
2020 Wear and Tear (2.5% x 150 000) 3 750
- The office building is being used for purposes of trade. As such, it qualifies as a commercial
building.
- Commercial buildings do not qualify for the Special Initial Allowance, hence Tirivakundi Pvt
Ltd will claim Wear and Tear as follows:
Date Description $
2016 Cost 80 000
2020 Wear and Tear (2.5% x 80 000) 2 000
Working 7: Machinery
Travelling Costs
- The travelling costs incurred by the procurement manager were expenditure necessary to
bring the machinery into a usable condition and location. As such, they are of a capital nature
and should be added to the cost of the machinery.
Description $
Purchase price 110 000
Add Travelling costs (capitalised) 2 000
Add Costs of Cutting and Levelling land 5 000
Less Capital nature foreign exchange gain (1 000)
Cost of Machinery 116 000
- It does not matter that the lawn mower is second hand, Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd can elect to claim
the Special Initial Allowance in the year of purchase.
- The canteen and restrooms qualify as industrial buildings since they are used in connection
with the manufacturing industry and therefore Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd can elect to claim the
Special Initial Allowance in the first year and the Accelerated Wear and Tear in the
subsequent years.
Year Description $
2018 Cost 36 000
2018 Less: Special Wear & Tear 25% (9 000)
ITV at the end of 2017 27 000
2019 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (9 000)
ITV at the end of 2018 18 000
2020 Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (9 000)
ITV at the end of 2020 9 000
Description $
Cost of 3 Units 90 000
Cost of 1 Unit ($90 000/3) 30 000
2020 threshold/limit per unit of staff housing 250 000
- $30 000< $250 000, therefore, the three living quarters for factory workers qualify for capital
allowances.
Description $
Cost of 5 Units 120 000
Cost of 1 Unit ($120 000/5) 24 000
2020 threshold/limit per unit of staff housing 25 000
- $24 000< $25 000, therefore, the five living quarters for administration workers qualify for
capital allowances.
- Whether or not staff housing is for administration or factory workers does not matter. Both
classes of living quarters still qualify for Special Initial Allowance.
Date Description $
2019 Cost 120 000
2019 Less: Special Initial Allowance 25% (30 000)
ITV at the end of 2019 90 000
2020 Accelerated Wear and Tear 25% (30 000)
ITV at the end of 2020 60 000
Year Description $
2016 Cost 20 000
2016 Less: Special Wear & Tear 25% (5 000)
ITV at the end of 2017 15 000
2017 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (5 000)
ITV at the end of 2018 10 000
2018 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (5 000)
ITV at the end of 2019 5 000
2019 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (5 000)
ITV at the end of 2019 -
2020 Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% -
ITV at the end of 2020 -
- No capital allowances will be claimed on the delivery van since it has a nil Income Tax Value
(ITV) at the end of 2019. (All allowances were claimed in respect of the delivery van since
Tirivakundi always endeavours to minimise his tax liability).
Commercial Vehicles
- The commercial motor vehicles qualified for Special Initial Allowance since Tirivakundi Pvt
Ltd endeavours to minimise his tax liability.
Date Description $
2017 Cost 180 000
2017 Less: Special Initial Allowance 25% (45 000)
ITV at the end of 2017 135 000
2018 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (45 000)
ITV at the end of 2018 90 000
2019 Less: Accelerated Wear & Tear 25% (45 000)
ITV at the end of 2019 45 000
2020 Accelerated Wear and Tear 25% (45 000)
ITV at the end of 2020 -
Description $
Cost of 2 Passenger Motor Vehicles 60 000
Cost of 1 Passenger Motor Vehicle ($60 000/2) 30 000
2017 threshold/limit per Passenger Motor Vehicle 10 000
- $30 000> $10 000, therefore, in 2017 the deemed cost for each passenger motor vehicle was
$10 000.
- Therefore the total accelerated Wear and Tear for the two Passenger Motor Vehicles is
$5 000.
Working 12: Storage Buildings
- The storage does not qualify as an industrial building since the goods stored in it are not
manufactured by Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd.
- Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd is receiving a fee for the storage of the sister company’s goods, hence the
storage building is being used for trade, and thus qualifies as a commercial building.
Therefore, Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd may only claim wear and tear.
Date Description $
2018 Cost 54 000
2020 Wear and Tear (2.5% x 54 000) 1 350
Working 13: Joint Project
- This is a joint project to carry out research with Capri Pvt Ltd.
- Capri Pvt Ltd was undertaking the research and incurred $1.6m on research costs. This
implies that the $240 000 contributed by Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd towards the research is included
in the $1.6m.
- With reference to Section 15 (2) (n), it was incorrect for Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd to deduct the
whole contribution of $240 000 since part of it was used to purchase capital nature items by
Capri Pvt Ltd.
Allowable deduction = A x B
C
= $105 000
Effect on Operating Profit
- Add back the $240 000 which had been initially deducted by Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd and deduct
the correct amount of $105 000.
Working 14: Cost of drilling borehole
- Staff Christmas party used to be deductible until the introduction of the Revenue Authority
Act. However, since the introduction, the commissioner now considers the staff Christmas
party expenses as part of entertainment expenses which are not deductible.
$ $
Selling Price 220 000
Less Payments:
Deposit 50 000
Instalments [7 x $220 000 - $50 000]
24 49 583 (99 583)
Outstanding balance 120 417
- Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd should be allowed a suspensive sales allowance according to Section 17
of the Income Tax Act.
- Gains from foreign exchange form part of gross income. Thus, they should be added to the
operating profit.
1 May 2020
USD 1 900 = ZWD (1 900 x 100)
= ZWD 190 000
30 November 2020
USD 1 900 = ZWD (1 900 x 80)
= ZWD 152 000
- A taxpayer who has received income in advance of expenditure to be incurred after end of
year of assessment when goods are delivered or services rendered, may be granted an
allowance by which the taxpayer has to deduct from the income, provided the taxpayer makes
an election in terms of Section 15 (2) (cc) of the Income Tax Act.
- In practice, the allowance is computed using the taxpayer’s general gross margin.
- Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd will elect Section 15 (2) (cc) in order to minimise its tax liability.
- From ‘Working 17: Suspensive Sales Allowance’ above, Tirivakundi Pvt Ltd’s gross profit
margin is as follows:
= 20%
Therefore Allowance = (100%-20%) x $203 000
= 80% x $203 000
= $162 400
- As per Section 8 (1) (k) of the Income Tax Act, discounts received are gross income in the in
the hands of the tax payer if they are received in the normal course of business, that is, not a
discount on the acquisition of non‐current assets.
- Therefore the discount received from the supplier is gross income in the hands of Tirivakundi
Pvt Ltd.
- The fact that the discount relates to a 2019 invoice does not matter because the cause of the
discount arose in 2020.
- As per Section 8 (1) (m) of the Income Tax Act, a subsidy is gross income in the hands of the
tax payer. Therefore the subsidy received from government is taxable in full in the hands of
the tax payer.
Effect on Operating Profit
- Add to operating profit since the subsidy receives is gross income in the hands of Tirivakundi
Pvt Ltd.
- Section 16 (1) (q) discourages thin capitalisation by limiting interest deductible for income
tax purposes.
- It disallows any expenditure incurred by a local branch or subsidiary of a foreign company in
servicing any debt or debts contracted in connection with the production of income to the
extent that such debt or debts cause the person to exceed a debt to equity ratio of three to one.
Details $
Issued Share Capital 60 000
Share Premium 200 000
Accumulated Loss (100 000)
6% Preference Shares 80 000
Total Equity 240 000
Where: A = total expenditure qualifying for deduction in terms of s15 of the Income Tax Act.
B = expenditure on general administration and management paid outside Zimbabwe
by the taxpayer
C = expenditure qualifying for deduction
QUESTION 2a
i. DEPOSITS ON RETURNABLE CONTAINER
Case Laws
- Per Brookes Lemos Ltd v CIR (1945) 14 SATC 295, it was held that deposits charged by the
company on glass containers of products supplied to customers, formed part of the
company’s gross income.
- Per Geldenhuys v C.I.R., 14 S.A.T.A. 419, the court held that an amount physically received
is only received for the purposes of the gross income definition if it is “received by the
taxpayer on his own behalf for his own benefit”.
Conclusion
- In relation to deposits on returnable containers, the term ‘received by’ implies that the
taxpayer has gained possession of the money which compensates the taxpayer in case the
depositor does not bring back the container. The deposit thus constitutes gross income,
subject to the following exceptions:
A deposit received by a person who sells commodities in returnable containers
constitutes gross income unless the deposit is received only in trust and cannot be
mixed with the taxpayer’s own funds, or there is an obligation on the customer to
return the container and the deposit is merely security to ensure performance of the
obligation.
Where the taxpayer is able to prove that the deposits where not received for his/her
own benefit.
Conclusion
- The term ‘received by’ in this instance, dwells merely around the fact that the borrower is in
custody of the borrowed funds which he/she is eventually obligated to repay to the lender. As
such, the term does not apply for the purposes of the definition of gross income.
Case Law
- Per ITC 1789 (67 SATC 205), where the taxpayer in question had solicited millions of rand
from a multitude of investors in a fraudulent and unlawful scheme, the court held that those
moneys had been “received” as contemplated in the definition of gross income.
- However, Per Cot v G [1981] (43 SATC 159), the Appellate Division of Zimbabwe held that
a person who steals money does not ‘receive’ it in the sense contemplated in the definition of
“gross income” in the Act, because he does not acquire the money on his own behalf and for
his own benefit.
- In the case of MP Finance Group CC (In Liquidation) v CSARS the High Court of Appeal
ruled that income “received by” a taxpayer from illegal gains will be taxable in the hands of
the taxpayer.
Conclusion
- In Zimbabwe, in spite of the case of Cot v G [1981] (43 SATC 159) income is still taxable
even if it is obtained from illegal activities.
- Therefore, the term ‘received by’ is relevant for use when referring to income that has been
obtained by the taxpayer illegally.
Case Law
- Per Geldenhuys v CIR 14 SATC 419, the court held that an amount physically received is
only received for the purposes of the gross income definition if it is “received by the taxpayer
on his own behalf for his own benefit”.
- Also, in CIR v Genn & Co (Pvt) Ltd (1955), it was held that an agent does not receive, but
keeps in custody for a principal.
- As held in ITC 11282 “......,the expression ‟received by him‟ means that the money must be
received by him in such circumstances that he becomes entitled to it.....In order for there to
be a “receipt”, the money must be “received “ by the taxpayer for his own benefit.”
Conclusion
- In relation to the agency principle, the term “received by”, for the purposes of the gross
income definition means that the income is received by the principal although the agent
would be the custodian of the same income.
- Therefore it can be concluded that the agent does not receive but keeps in custody.
Case Law
- Per ITC 675 (1945) 16 SATC 238, the appellant company’s business of poultry farming
included the supply of day-old chicks to customers in terms of a contract embodied in a
printed form. The contract provided for payment of the purchase price in advance. It was
refundable if the company failed to deliver all, or part, of the order. The delivery date and the
condition of the goods on arrival were not guaranteed. Orders were not subject to
cancellation by customers. The amounts received in advance were accounted for as liabilities
in the books of account. These amounts were treated as deposits received for containers and
against poultry to be supplied. The Commissioner included these amounts received in
advance in the gross income of the company, and subjected them to tax.
Held: since deposits received from prospective purchasers of day-old chicks to be delivered
in the future were not refundable at the instance of the depositor, such deposits represented
income in the hands of the seller.
Conclusion
- In relation to deposits for day-old chicks, the term received by implies that the deposit has
passed to the recipient and since the recipient cannot refund that deposit at the instance of the
customer, it means the deposit is his own income (all the risks and rewards with regards to
that deposit are in the hands of the recipient).
- As such, the deposit constitutes gross income and is taxable in accordance with Section 8 of
the Income Tax Act.
QUESTION 2b
i. Licensed Investor
- Licensed investor means a person under the Export Processing Zones Act [Chapter 14:07]
before its repeal by the Zimbabwe Investment Authority Act [Chapter 14:30] (No. 4 of 2006)
on the 1st January 2007.
- Also exempted are, royalties payable by a licensed investor out of his operations in the special
economic zone.
- The export manufacturing company must prove to the Commissioner that its taxable income
is derived from the manufacturing operations conducted in Zimbabwe during the year of
assessment.
- The output is measured in terms of the physical units or quantities and assessed separately for
each year of assessment.
B – BUILD
O – OWN
O - OPERATE
T - TRANSFER
- A BOOT Operator arrangement occurs when a contractor enters into a contract/contracts with
the State or a statutory corporation under which the contractor undertakes to construct
infrastructure for the State or statutory corporation.
- The consideration of the contractor will be in the form of a right to operate or control the
infrastructure for a specified period after which the contractor will transfer ownership or
control of the item to the State or statutory corporation.