What Happens to Documents and Records Submitted to KRA?

Documents submitted to KRA can become decisive evidence in an audit, objection, refund claim or appeal. A taxpayer should retain its own complete, searchable copy and proof of what was delivered, when, by whom and through which channel. KRA’s statutory confidentiality obligations do not mean the taxpayer should treat submission as a transfer of sole custody. Where a document already supplied to KRA is needed again, the taxpayer should identify it precisely and request the authority’s copy or certified copy. KRA should not penalise a taxpayer for failing to reproduce material that is already in KRA’s custody.

Tax records serve both compliance and evidence functions

Section 23 of the Tax Procedures Act, 2015 requires a person liable to tax to keep records needed to determine tax liability. The statutory retention period is a minimum, not a business case for destroying information at the first possible date. A longer retention period may be sensible where there is an audit, objection, appeal, contractual warranty, insolvency issue, ongoing transaction or other legal requirement.

For tax purposes, the important record is rarely a single invoice. A position may depend on the contract, order, delivery or service evidence, tax invoice, payment record, bank statement, return, ledger entry, credit note, customs entry, payroll schedule or calculation that links the transaction to the treatment claimed. The records should be kept in English or Kiswahili as the Act requires, or with an accessible translation where necessary. A file that cannot be searched, reconciled or connected to a tax period is less useful than a smaller but well-indexed archive.

Tax records also become evidence of what the taxpayer told KRA. There is a material difference between having a document internally and having supplied it during an audit. For every submission, maintain a submission bundle: the covering letter or portal message, the exact attachments, file names, page count, tax reference, recipient, delivery confirmation and later response. If documents were supplied in stages, preserve a dated schedule rather than relying on memory or an email chain.

What KRA may do with submitted information

KRA may obtain and use information for the administration of tax laws, subject to the powers, limits and confidentiality regime in the Tax Procedures Act. Section 6 imposes confidentiality obligations on the Commissioner and authorised officers in relation to information acquired in administering a tax law. That protection is important, but it is not absolute secrecy. The Act permits disclosure in defined circumstances, including where disclosure is authorised for tax administration, another lawful purpose, a court or other person authorised by law.

For a business, the practical message is twofold. First, make factual submissions accurately and consistently because they may be used in an assessment, an objection decision or later proceedings. Secondly, do not assume that a document marked confidential will never be disclosed in a lawful tax, court, enforcement or information-sharing setting. If the material contains privileged legal advice, commercially sensitive third-party information or personal data, identify that issue when responding and obtain advice on the appropriate handling. Confidentiality, privilege and data protection are related but distinct legal questions.

Internal access should be controlled as well. Limit who can upload documents, change accounting records, respond to KRA or share tax files with advisers. Use a central tax-data room or equivalent system with role-based access, version history and a clear approval process. This is practical risk control, not an attempt to withhold information. It reduces the chance that an inconsistent spreadsheet, draft calculation or incomplete document is presented as the company’s final tax position.

Proof of submission is often as important as the document

Taxpayers sometimes lose a dispute not because the source record is weak, but because they cannot prove KRA received it. Portal acknowledgements, upload receipts, electronic timestamps, delivery reports, stamped cover letters, courier tracking and correspondence acknowledging receipt can all matter. Preserve them alongside the document, not in a separate email account that may be closed when staff leave.

Where a submission is too large for a single channel, use a numbered index and state clearly whether the bundle is complete or a first instalment. If KRA asks for further records, answer the request item by item and record what is not available, what has already been supplied and what needs third-party retrieval. A response saying “all documents attached” is risky if the attachments are incomplete, duplicated or unreadable. A structured schedule helps both sides identify the actual evidential gap.

When the document is supplied by a tax agent, advocate, auditor or employee, the taxpayer should still retain a final copy of the filed bundle and the acknowledgement. Authority to submit should be documented. This becomes especially important after a change of adviser, employee departure or corporate restructuring. The company remains responsible for preserving its evidence even if an external provider maintains the working file.

Digital records need the same discipline as paper records. Retain the native file where it shows useful metadata, a stable PDF or other readable copy, and a clear description of the system from which it came. Document any export or conversion process. Avoid overwriting source records after a notice or audit begins; ordinary correction procedures and audit trails are safer than silent alteration. Backups should be secure, tested and accessible to the person responsible for an urgent tax response.

Requesting records already held by KRA

Where a taxpayer needs a document it previously submitted, make a focused written request. Identify the tax head, period, date and channel of the original submission, the document name or description and why a copy is needed. Attach proof of the original delivery where available. Request a certified copy where certification is required for a proceeding or where authenticity is likely to be disputed. Keep the request and response in the tax file.

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Fleur Investments Ltd v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes & another [2018] eKLR is a significant practical authority. The court held that KRA, having received tax records and other documents, had a responsibility to keep them in safe custody. It criticised penalising a taxpayer for failing to attach documents already submitted to KRA and observed that a taxpayer needing documents in KRA’s custody should be able to obtain certified copies on application.

Fleur Investments does not mean that a taxpayer can stop retaining its own records or submit vague requests to KRA. It addresses a specific unfairness where the authority already held the documents. The safer course is still to retain an independent duplicate, prove the original submission and identify the material precisely. If KRA says it cannot locate a record, ask for a written response and preserve the issue in any objection or appeal. The fact of prior submission may be relevant both to the merits and to procedural fairness.

Build a record-governance process before a dispute begins

Good tax-record governance is a continuing process. Assign an owner for each tax head, establish retention rules, record deadlines and create a standard process for responding to KRA. The response process should require a legal and financial review before documents leave the business, with an index of the final bundle and approval by the relevant officer. The purpose is accuracy and traceability, not delay.

For an active audit or dispute, issue a tailored preservation notice internally. Pause routine deletion for the affected periods, systems and custodians; preserve messaging, finance-system extracts, contracts and originals; and ensure that departure of a finance employee does not remove access to the relevant files. A later reconstruction may help explain the position, but it is rarely a substitute for the contemporaneous record.

• Keep a complete copy of every KRA submission with its acknowledgement.
• Index records by tax head, period, transaction and source system.
• Retain original or native digital files, readable copies and audit trails.
• Mark privileged or third-party confidential material for appropriate review.
• Request KRA-held records in writing with enough detail to identify them.
• Preserve records beyond the minimum period where an audit or dispute is live.

Submitted records should be treated as a shared evidential trail, not as documents the taxpayer no longer needs. The taxpayer’s own copy, proof of delivery and a disciplined request for KRA-held material can determine whether an audit is resolved efficiently or turns into an avoidable dispute about what was supplied. That discipline protects compliance, confidentiality and the ability to prove a tax position when it matters.

Official source: Tax Procedures Act, 2015 — sections 6 and 23.