The Lion Match Company (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service

Lion Match Company disposed of pre‑valuation date shares during the 2008 tax year and calculated its capital gains tax using market values as at 1 October 2001 based on a KPMG report. SARS issued an additional assessment adjusting the base cost downward, increasing Lion Match’s tax liability. Lion Match objected and appealed to the Tax Court. After prolonged procedural steps and preparation for a ten‑day hearing, Lion Match’s attorneys withdrew shortly before the hearing. On the first day of trial, Lion Match—without having given prior notice—applied for a postponement, relying on a brief affidavit alleging a conflict of interest and failed attempts to secure counsel. The Tax Court refused the postponement and proceeded in Lion Match’s absence. SARS then led unchallenged evidence seeking an upward adjustment of the assessment. The Tax Court held it lacked jurisdiction to grant such relief in the taxpayer’s absence. On appeal, the Gauteng Full Court dismissed Lion Match’s postponement appeal and upheld SARS’s cross‑appeal. Lion Match sought reconsideration and further appeal to the SCA.

The reconsideration application was struck from the roll with costs. The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

The case clarifies the strict and exceptional nature of reconsideration under s 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act and reaffirms principles governing postponements in South African procedure. Importantly, it confirms that the Tax Court has jurisdiction to alter an assessment upward at SARS’s behest under the Tax Administration Act, even where the taxpayer is absent, thereby strengthening the court’s adjudicative powers and discouraging dilatory tactics in tax litigation.