NAIROBI, Kenya — Coca-Cola Beverages Limited has lost a Sh69.76 million input VAT claim after the Tax Appeals Tribunal ruled that the company introduced the claim after the statutory six-month deadline.
The Tribunal dismissed Coca-Cola’s appeal against the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) and upheld the tax authority’s decision to reject the claim.
The judgment, delivered on September 11, 2026, concerned Sh69,756,165 in input VAT incurred on taxable purchases made in January 2025.
Coca-Cola Omitted VAT From July Return
Coca-Cola told the Tribunal that it had incurred the disputed input VAT in January 2025 but inadvertently omitted the invoices from its original July 2025 VAT return.
The company subsequently filed an amended July return on August 20, 2025, adding the January invoices and the Sh69.76 million input VAT claim.
KRA rejected the claim, arguing that the six-month statutory period for claiming input VAT had expired on July 31, 2025.
The tax authority subsequently issued a rejection notice on September 19, 2025, prompting Coca-Cola to challenge the decision.
Tribunal Rules Six-Month Deadline Had Expired
The central question before the Tribunal was whether Coca-Cola could rely on the July 2025 tax period even though the amended return introducing the claim was filed in August.
The company argued that January 2025 purchases could be claimed in the July 2025 tax period because July was the sixth month after January.
It maintained that the July VAT return was legally due on August 20 and that filing the amendment on that date therefore remained within the statutory window.
The Tribunal rejected that interpretation.
“The six months period runs from the period in which the supplies /importation occurred and does not depend on when the VAT return was filed,” the Tribunal ruled.
August Amendment Came Too Late
The Tribunal found that the six-month period for input VAT arising from January 2025 purchases ended on July 31, 2025.
It distinguished between correcting an existing claim and introducing a claim for the first time.
According to the Tribunal, if Coca-Cola had included the January input VAT in its July return and later amended the return to correct an error, the amendment could have been permissible.
However, the January input VAT had been completely omitted from the original July return.
The August 20 amendment therefore amounted to introducing the claim for the first time after the statutory deadline had expired.
Tribunal Rejects Coca-Cola’s Filing-Date Argument
Coca-Cola argued that Section 17(2) of the VAT Act should be interpreted by reference to the tax period to which the return relates rather than the date on which the return was physically filed.
The company pointed to the fact that a July VAT return is ordinarily due on August 20.
It argued that because the amended return still related to July, the January input VAT claim remained within the six-month period.
The Tribunal disagreed, holding that the filing deadline for the July return did not extend the six-month period created under Section 17(2).
“The fact that the July 2025 VAT return itself is due on 20th August 2025 does not extend the six months period to 20th August,” the Tribunal said.
Coca-Cola Cited Earlier Court Decisions
Coca-Cola relied on previous decisions, including the Highlands Mineral Water Ltd v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes case, in arguing that the mechanics of filing VAT returns should not extinguish a substantive input-tax entitlement.
The company also cited the Tribunal’s decision in Trans Africa Motors Ltd v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes, where an amendment introducing earlier input VAT entries into a later return had been allowed because the entries were still within the statutory six-month period.
Coca-Cola argued that its January 2025 invoices similarly fell within the six-month window when considered against the July tax period.
The Tribunal, however, found the facts distinguishable because Coca-Cola had not included the disputed input VAT in its July return before the deadline.
iTax Acceptance Did Not Save Claim
Coca-Cola also argued that its amended return had been accepted by iTax, KRA’s electronic tax filing system.
The company said the system’s acceptance of the amended entries created a legitimate expectation that the claim had been validly lodged.
The Tribunal ultimately determined the dispute on the statutory deadline and rejected the VAT claim without relying on that argument to alter its finding.
The Tribunal’s decision therefore turned on when the input VAT claim was first introduced, rather than simply whether the electronic system accepted the amended return.
Tribunal Dismisses Coca-Cola Appeal
The Tribunal found that KRA was justified in rejecting the Sh69.76 million input VAT claim.
It dismissed Coca-Cola’s appeal and upheld KRA’s December 15, 2025 Objection Decision.
The Tribunal also ordered that each party bear its own costs.
The decision provides a significant clarification for VAT-registered businesses: where input VAT is omitted entirely from the relevant returns, a subsequent amendment cannot necessarily revive the claim after the six-month statutory window has expired.
