THE High Court has ordered the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (Zimra) to release a vehicle it impounded from a former army officer after finding that the tax authority acted unfairly and unlawfully in its case against the ex-soldier.
Justice Maxwell Takuva ruled that Zimra violated fundamental administrative justice rules in its case against Precious Makwinja, a former Zimbabwe National Army officer who served on a United Nations peacekeeping mission in South Sudan.
According to the court papers, Makwinja was deployed to South Sudan in November 2021, under the UN banner on a peacekeeping mission authorised by the government of Zimbabwe.
Makwinja imported a 2013 Range Rover Evoque in May 2023 under an immigrant’s rebate after returning from her deployment.
Zimra initially seized the vehicle in December 2023 but released it after verifying her documents.
Months later, in March 2024, Zimra seized the vehicle again.
It accused Makwinja of violating rebate terms by being out of the country for over six months and letting her sister-in-law use the vehicle.
The authority later demanded payment of over US$11 800 in duty, a 100% fine, and other charges.
When Makwinja appealed, the commissioner of customs dismissed his appeal and introduced new charges not in the original seizure notice.
These included allegations that she changed her address without notifying Zimra and had "emigrated" to South Sudan.
Takuva found this switch unfair.
"It is axiomatic, in criminal as well as disciplinary proceedings, that a person cannot be found guilty of an offence that has not been preferred against him, unless that offence is a competent verdict on the offence originally charged,” the judge ruled.
“Any such action would constitute a blatant miscarriage of justice.”
He said the commissioner's decision was "procedurally unfair and ultra vires."
He ruled that a temporary, state-sanctioned UN deployment did not constitute emigration, a term implying permanent departure.
Zimra's own filings noted her absence was under six months, contradicting the emigration claim.
On the charge of letting her sister-in-law use the car, the judge accepted Makwinja’s explanation that the vehicle was parked at the relative’s home for safekeeping and occasional maintenance.
He clarified that the law prohibits the transfer of ownership or beneficial use, not mere custodianship for security.
"The commissioner’s substitution of charges, reliance on irrelevant considerations, and disregard of the applicant’s representations clearly fall short of these standards,” the judge said.
“The commissioner’s decision clearly falls outside those bounds and was therefore unreasonable and irregular.
“The applicant’s case, therefore, meets the threshold for judicial intervention as established, the court may set aside the administrative decision.”
He ordered Zimra to release Makwinja’s vehicle within 10 days, waive all storage fees, and pay her legal costs.