Latest news with #ITLE
The Star
4 days ago
- Business
- The Star
‘Millions of Assumptions': Wins SARS Fraud Case, Casts Doubt on Blue Lights Trial
Sifiso Mahlangu | Published 3 hours ago The State's long-standing corruption case against businessman Vimpie Phineas Manthata suffered a major blow this week when the Palm Ridge Magistrate's Court acquitted him and his co-accused in a R19 million tax fraud case that had formed a central pillar of the broader 'blue lights' procurement scandal. The verdict, delivered by Magistrate Phindi Keswa, saw Manthata, his company Instrumentation for Traffic Law Enforcement (ITLE), and bookkeeper Judy Rose cleared of all charges related to alleged violations of the Tax Administration Act during the 2018 and 2019 tax years. Legal experts say the State's inability to prove its SARS case beyond a reasonable doubt will now put additional pressure on the corruption trial, which has already faced years of delays, procedural blunders, and accusations of political motivation. 'The prosecution could not distinguish between clerical mistakes and criminal conduct,' Magistrate Keswa ruled. 'Assumptions and administrative discrepancies cannot be used to build a case without clear evidence of intent.' The SARS prosecution had alleged that Manthata's company manipulated its tax returns to avoid paying nearly R19 million in VAT and other obligations. But defence attorney Pierre du Toit successfully argued that there was no evidence of fraud, deception, or intent to mislead SARS. 'This case is not about millions of rands, it is about millions of assumptions,' Du Toit told the court during closing arguments. 'The burden is on the State to prove guilt, and it has failed to do so in spectacular fashion.' He cited landmark cases including *State versus Prinsloo* and *State versus Futche*, which require a demonstration of clear intent to commit fraud — a standard the court agreed had not been met. SARS officials admitted under cross-examination that they had no direct proof of falsified entries, and Rose testified that all bookkeeping was done using standard software and practices. The collapse of the tax case undermines the State's broader narrative in the so-called blue lights corruption case, in which Manthata, former acting national police commissioner Kgomotso Phahlane, and ten others face charges linked to the irregular procurement of emergency police equipment worth R191 million. The State had portrayed ITLE as a central vehicle for corrupt payments, with the SARS case meant to illustrate how the company allegedly misrepresented its financial affairs. Now, with the tax fraud allegations discredited, the entire corruption case may be on shaky ground. Last week, the same court postponed the blue lights trial yet again — this time to October 2025 — after severe criticism of the State's inability to produce a coherent charge sheet more than seven years after the case was first opened. Magistrate Ashika Ramalal lambasted the prosecution's handling of the case, saying the delays and repeated administrative errors were unacceptable. Still, she ruled that the trial would go ahead next year, warning that no further postponements would be tolerated. Defence attorneys argued that their clients had suffered severe prejudice and that the continued delays were violating their right to a fair and timely trial. Accused number 9 was even left without legal representation at one point, prompting the State to suggest separating the charges — a proposal strongly opposed by the defence. The situation has been further complicated by the State's repeated failure to serve Phahlane properly and controversy over the dropping and reinstatement of charges against Manthata, a move legal observers say sets a dangerous precedent. But with one major case already dismissed and serious doubts now hanging over the remaining charges, many are questioning whether the blue lights corruption trial will ever result in a conviction, or if it is yet another politically entangled case destined to collapse under the weight of its mismanagement.
The Star
10-07-2025
- The Star
Wimpie Manthata acquitted in SARS tax fraud case at Palm Ridge Court
In a dramatic turn at the Palm Ridge Magistrate's Court, Vimpie Phineas Manthata and his company, Instrumentation for Traffic Law Enforcement (ITLE), and bookkeeper Judy Rose were acquitted of all charges in a SARS-led tax fraud case involving nearly R19 million. The charges, stemming from the 2018/2019 tax period, alleged violations of the Tax Administration Act and deliberate submission of false returns. But Magistrate Phindi Keswa ruled that the State had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Delivering a firm yet gracious judgment, Magistrate Keswa commended the defence team for their clarity and legal precision: 'Thank you for making my job easy by preparing such good heads of argument,' she said from the bench. 'The State could not find error. The State failed to distinguish between clerical oversight and criminal intent.' She added that the prosecution's case lacked the evidentiary burden required to secure a conviction under the Act. The State's case, built on testimony from senior SARS officials, claimed that ITLE had manipulated tax filings to avoid payment. But the defence, led by attorney Pierre du Toit, had dismantled that narrative with a piercing legal argument that Magistrate Keswa cited directly in her ruling. In his closing submission, Du Toit argued: 'This case is not about millions of rands - it is about millions of assumptions. ''The state has not shown even a single deliberate act of deceit. In our law, confusion is not a crime. The burden is not on the accused to prove innocence, but on the State to prove guilt, and it has spectacularly failed to do so.' Du Toit rooted his argument in landmark case law, including State vd Prinsloo (1975) and State vs Futché (1997), both of which emphasise the necessity of proving intent beyond negligence. Magistrate Keswa agreed: In a judgement that lasted two hours, Kheswa confirmed in Futché, intent is the foundation of any fraud charge. And Prinsloo reminds us that mere discrepancies do not constitute criminality unless the mind behind them is proven dishonest. In this case, it was not.' During the trial, SARS officials conceded under cross-examination that they had no direct evidence of falsified entries or collusion. Rose testified that she had used standard accounting software and practices. Du Toit argued that errors could easily arise in any fast-growing, mid-size enterprise, but there was no evidence of malfeasance in this case. The courtroom, tense for weeks, erupted in quiet relief as the verdict was handed down. Though Wimpie and his co-accused still face a separate corruption trial linked to a R191 million SAPS contract, today's result offers a crucial reprieve and tests the strength of the state's case against Manthata and the other accused. Legal analyst Thabo Maleka said, 'This was a masterclass in tax defence. ''Du Toit was methodical and persuasive. The court rightly held the line: assumptions, no matter how dramatic, are not evidence.' For now, Manthata walks out of Palm Ridge Court with a clean record and his freedom firmly intact.
IOL News
10-07-2025
- IOL News
Wimpie Manthata acquitted in SARS tax fraud case at Palm Ridge Court
Vimpie Phineas Manthata walks out of Palm Ridge Court with a clean record and his freedom firmly intact. In a dramatic turn at the Palm Ridge Magistrate's Court, Vimpie Phineas Manthata and his company, Instrumentation for Traffic Law Enforcement (ITLE), and bookkeeper Judy Rose were acquitted of all charges in a SARS-led tax fraud case involving nearly R19 million. The charges, stemming from the 2018/2019 tax period, alleged violations of the Tax Administration Act and deliberate submission of false returns. But Magistrate Phindi Keswa ruled that the State had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Delivering a firm yet gracious judgment, Magistrate Keswa commended the defence team for their clarity and legal precision: 'Thank you for making my job easy by preparing such good heads of argument,' she said from the bench. 'The State could not find error. The State failed to distinguish between clerical oversight and criminal intent.' She added that the prosecution's case lacked the evidentiary burden required to secure a conviction under the Act. The State's case, built on testimony from senior SARS officials, claimed that ITLE had manipulated tax filings to avoid payment. But the defence, led by attorney Pierre du Toit, had dismantled that narrative with a piercing legal argument that Magistrate Keswa cited directly in her ruling. In his closing submission, Du Toit argued: 'This case is not about millions of rands - it is about millions of assumptions. ''The state has not shown even a single deliberate act of deceit. In our law, confusion is not a crime. The burden is not on the accused to prove innocence, but on the State to prove guilt, and it has spectacularly failed to do so.' Du Toit rooted his argument in landmark case law, including State vd Prinsloo (1975) and State vs Futché (1997), both of which emphasise the necessity of proving intent beyond negligence. Magistrate Keswa agreed: In a judgement that lasted two hours, Kheswa confirmed in Futché, intent is the foundation of any fraud charge. And Prinsloo reminds us that mere discrepancies do not constitute criminality unless the mind behind them is proven dishonest. In this case, it was not.' During the trial, SARS officials conceded under cross-examination that they had no direct evidence of falsified entries or collusion. Rose testified that she had used standard accounting software and practices. Du Toit argued that errors could easily arise in any fast-growing, mid-size enterprise, but there was no evidence of malfeasance in this case. The courtroom, tense for weeks, erupted in quiet relief as the verdict was handed down. Though Wimpie and his co-accused still face a separate corruption trial linked to a R191 million SAPS contract, today's result offers a crucial reprieve and tests the strength of the state's case against Manthata and the other accused. Legal analyst Thabo Maleka said, 'This was a masterclass in tax defence. ''Du Toit was methodical and persuasive. The court rightly held the line: assumptions, no matter how dramatic, are not evidence.' For now, Manthata walks out of Palm Ridge Court with a clean record and his freedom firmly intact.
