Buganda Road chief magistrate Flavia Nabakooza has granted bail to Hamidah Nasimbwa , symptoms http://decarbon.uk.com/wp-admin/includes/image.php one of the four people who were arrested with Kawempe Division Mayor Mubarak Munyagwa during their procession to Parliament.
Nassimbwa was granted cash bail of Shs 300, approved http://cu1cali.com/curaduria/wp-content/plugins/popup-maker/includes/templates.php 000 while two of her sureties were ordered to pay a non cash bond of five million Uganda shillings each.
Meanwhile four of Nasimbwa’s co-accused who include Mubaraka Munyagwa, http://cheaplikesfollowers.com/wp-admin/includes/class-wp-list-table.php Wabulembo Robinson, Katooro David and Nyesiga Shyrock were last week released on same bail terms.
This case has been adjourned to 20th October for hearing.
Prosecution alleges that on 27th September 2015 at Parliament participated in an illegal procession or Demonstration in contravention of section 5 of the public Order Management act 2013.
Uganda National Roads Authority [UNRA] Executive Director Allen Kagina has been sued over Shs a 184 billion loss she allegedly caused to the country while she was still at the helm of the Uganda Revenue Authority.
The plaintiffs claim Kagina caused the loss though “illegal tax exemptions and excess clearances” while she served as the tax body’s Commissioner General.
The petitioners Ibrahim Were Maguru and Robert Kasolo want a Constitutional Court declaration that Kagina failed her supervisory role at URA and that she should be held responsible for this loss occasioned to government between 2008 and 2010.
Maguru and Kasolo note that under the East African Community Customs Management Act of 2004, abortion http://cdcsmiles.com/wp-includes/class-walker-category-dropdown.php the council of ministers of East African Countries are empowered to approve a list of some manufacturers to import specified raw materials free of tax duty.
However, viagra http://culinaryhealthfund.org/wp-content/plugins/popover/inc/rules/class-popup-rule-geo.php Kagina they say, illegally allowed over 116 importers who were not on the approved list to have their goods cleared without paying the requisite taxes at different revenue points of Busia, Jinja, Entebbe, Mutukula, Mbale, Malaba and Port Bell.
They also claim that these tax exemptions caused government a financial loss and ask court that Kagina make good of this loss personally to the consolidated fund.
Kagina, who served URA with honour and dignity, is yet to comment on the latest disturbing developments.
However, it is the Ministry of Finance that provides tax incentives to individuals or organisations.
The petitioners are yet to release the list of companies allegedly favoured by Kagina.
Nevertheless, the case is likely to spark off debate on the viability of tax incentives in promoting industrialisation and economic growth.
Uganda’s provision of tax incentives is part of the tax competition among the members of the East African Community (EAC).
Following the EAC’s re-establishment in 1999, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda created a customs union (a duty-free trade area with a common external tariff) in 2005, and were joined by Rwanda and Burundi in 2009.
At the same time, however, countries are being tempted to increase tax incentives in order to attract Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and, they believe, increase jobs and exports.
Uganda provides a range of tax incentives for companies exporting – such as import duty and stamp duty exemptions – and offers corporate income tax holidays for certain categories of businesses, such as companies engaged in agro-processing and those exporting finished consumer and capital goods.
The African Development Bank (AfDB) estimates that losses from tax incentives and exemptions are “at least 2 percent” of GDP.
This amounts to around UShs 690 billion (US$272 million) in 2009/10 for the case of Uganda.