1. This ruling determines the application dated 19th January, 2023, seeking stay of execution of the orders of the TAT issued on 20th December, 2023.
2. The applicant is apprehensive that following this decision, the respondent will move in to enforce recovery of KShs.10,388,275/=. To do so will not only cause unreasonable expense and harm but may grind the operations of the applicant. I am therefore satisfied that the applicant has met the first limb of an application under order 42 rule 6, being that it will suffer substantial loss if the application is not allowed.
3. On the second limb, the applicant takes issue with the decision of the Tribunal in that the demand related to importation of goods outside the period stipulated in LN No. EAC/180/2018. The grounds of appeal as indicated in the memorandum of appeal are not frivolous and should be canvassed substantively.
4. On the issue of security, Mr Ondari while addressing court indicated that the applicant was willing to offer 2m security. This is up their previous offer of KShs.500,000/=. The respondents pray that the applicants be ordered to pay 50% of the taxes collectable, which amounts to Kshs.5,150,000/= roughly.
5. This court has time and again indicated that the rationale for payment of security is to provide a form of cushion to a decree holder for the performance of a decree but that such security must balance this with the rights of a party to have their appeal heard and determined.
6. Taking this into account it is therefore my finding that the application is successful and it is allowed on condition that the applicant deposits the amount of KShs.3,000,000/= with the respondent within the next 30 days, in default the stay orders shall be deemed to have lapsed and the respondent shall be at liberty to execute.