The Acting Chairman of the Rivers State Internal Revenue Service (RSIRS), Mr Chibuzor Aholu, has described last Friday’s verdict of the Court of Appeal, ordering the Rivers State Government to suspend the collection of Value Added Tax (VAT), as an endorsement of illegality which has been perpetuated by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), for a very long time.
But Aholu said unlike the FIRS, Rivers State was governed by a law-abiding government, and would obey the Court of Appeal order.
He, however, said the appropriate law officers of the state government would take necessary judicial steps to address the issue.
Aholu made the position known in an interview with newsmen in Port Harcourt, last Friday.
He said it was shocking that the FIRS had tried to get an endorsement of its illegal collections of VAT from states, through the backdoor, by writing to the National Assembly, seeking the amendment of the nation’s Constitution.
While reacting, however, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mike Ozekhome, made serious attempt to interpret the ruling of the Court of Appeal in the case involving the Federal Inland Revenue Service and the Rivers State Government over who has the right to collect VAT.
The human rights lawyer stated his position on the ruling in a statement he made available to newsmen, last Saturday.
It would be recalled that a Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt had in a judgment in suit number FHC/PH/CS/149/2020, held that the Rivers State Government had the powers to collect VAT within its territory.
The Rivers State Governor, Chief Nyesom Wike had also assented to the Rivers State Value Added Tax Law 2021 in August, after it was passed by the state House of Assembly.
The FIRS had then gone to the Court of Appeal where Justice Haruna Tsammani, last Friday, told the parties to the dispute to “maintain status quo”.
But according to Ozekhome, the ruling of the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, last Friday, meant that the Rivers State Government has the power to collect VAT until the court decides otherwise.
He said in the statement, “Clearly, the status quo ante bellum was before the breakout of the hostilities.
“The hostilities broke out when the FIRS dragged the Rivers State Government to court, arguing that it cannot collect VAT based on its law. The said law was already duly passed and made operational by Rivers State House of Assembly, that it has the constitutional competency under Section 4 of the Constitution to do so.
“The FHC, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, had earlier held that it was the Rivers State Government that was competent to collect VAT, not the FIRS.
“The law was already, therefore, in operation before the FIRS challenged the validity of an FHC judgement, PH, that had given the Rivers State Government the power to collect the VAT.
“So, the status quo is that it is the Rivers State Government that has the power to collect VAT, until perhaps, the Court of Appeal rules otherwise and set aside the FHC judgment.”
Meanwhile, the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, yesterday, said that President Muhammadu Buhari would abide by whatever final verdict the judiciary passes on the ongoing Value Added Tax (VAT) legal tussle.
Adesina, who spoke on a live current affairs programme on Arise Television, This Day Live, however, predicted that the matter has the likelihood of ending up at the Supreme Court.
He assured that President Muhammadu Buhari would allow the legal matter run its full course as he is not in the habit of muzzling institutions.
Adesina, who was reacting to a question on the matter, which had generated some heat in the last few days, also took a swipe at critics who would rather pick holes in the announced audited report and profit after tax of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), instead of appreciating a positive happening for the first time.
Giving his personal opinion on the tussle on VAT, the presidential spokesman noted that the tug could be seen in the light of fulfilling some of the several citizens’ demands of all times, which is fiscal federalism.
He, however, noted that achieving fiscal federalism bust must be done within the ambits of the law.
“I think the VAT issue is good because there have been talks about restructuring and fiscal federalism in the country. If states eventually get their demands in respect of VAT, there will be something like fulfilling fiscal federalism. But then, fiscal federalism itself must be done within the ambits of the law.
“That is why this issue may, and will likely, end up in the Supreme Court and when the Supreme Court pronounces, that is what the law says. If it’s in favour of the states, fine. If it’s in favour of the Federal Government, fine. You know that even all these states are not unanimous. You have heard some governors speaking out against the position of certain states who are so militant on this VAT issue.
“So eventually, we will have a legal pronouncement, which may come from the highest court in the land and whatever that court says, then is the law in the country. Knowing the Buhari administration, it will obey the rule of law,” he said.
Earlier, the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, had last Friday, ordered the Rivers State Government, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) and the Attorney-General of the Federation, to maintain status quo, pending the hearing and determination of applications before it in respect of the Valued Added Tax (VAT).
The Federal High Court, Port Harcourt, had on August 9, declared that it was the Rivers State Government, and not FIRS that should collect VAT and Personal Income Tax in the state.
The three-man panel of Appeal Court justices led by Justice Hassan Tsammani, ordered all parties to maintain status quo, and refrain from taking any action that would give effect to the judgment of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt.
Justice Tsammani held that since all parties in the matter had submitted themselves before the court, it was proper and the law for the court to preserve the res (subject matter) from being rendered nugatory.
Consequently, the court held that parties should refrain from giving effect to the judgment of the trial court in Port Harcourt, pending the hearing and determination of the application of the FIRS to stay execution of the trial court’s judgment.
Parties are also to maintain status quo pending the hearing of an application by the Attorney-General of Lagos State to be joined as a party in the matter.
Counsel to the appellant/applicant, Mr Mahmud Magaji (SAN), made an oral application for an order that status quo be maintained, pending the hearing and determination of the motion for injunction and stay.
However, Mr Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), counsel to Rivers State Government and Mr Oyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), counsel to Lagos State Government, both opposed the application for status quo.
Mr Tijani Ghazali (SAN), who represented the attorney-general for his part, supported the application for status quo to be maintained.
The applicants have been given two days to file their written addresses in respect to the pending applications, just as the respondents have also been given two days to file, and the applicant has one day to reply on points of law.
The matter has been adjourned until September 16.