Yeukai Karengezeka-Chisepo-Court Correspondent
A freight company director has appeared in court facing charges of allegedly converting US$56 184 entrusted to him for the payment of a Zimbabwe Revenue Authority penalty and reportedly using undervalued invoices to evade part of his client’s import duty obligations.
Super Sonic Freight and Logistics, represented by its director Kui Bao (62), is the first accused, while Bao is also facing charges in his personal capacity as the second accused.
The company and Bao are in the business of sea freight, container customs clearance and related services.
Bao appeared before Harare magistrate Mr Tapiwa Kuhudzai on Monday facing three counts of theft of trust property. He was granted US$300 bail.
The complainant, Zhonh International Private Limited, is represented by its director, Zhiwei Yang.
Prosecutor Ms Chipo Muvhamba alleged that in January this year, ZIMRA imposed a penalty of ZiG8 548 518 on Zhonh International.
The court heard that the company engaged Bao to facilitate payment of the penalty to ZIMRA.
Bao allegedly advised Mr Yang that US$85 000 was required to settle the penalty. Between March and April this year, Mr Yang allegedly handed over the money to Bao in instalments of US$10 000 on March 31, US$40 000 on April 9 and US$35 000 on April 24.
The State alleges that after receiving the money, Bao only paid ZiG778 854 to ZIMRA, equivalent to US$28 816, and allegedly converted the remaining US$56 184 to his own use.
As a result, Zhonh International allegedly suffered an actual prejudice of US$56 184, with nothing recovered.
On the second count, the State alleges that in January 2026, Mr Yang imported goods that attracted import duty of ZiG454 369.
Bao was allegedly engaged to facilitate payment of the duty to ZIMRA and advised Mr Yang to provide US$15 145 for the transaction.
He allegedly handed the money to Bao on January 15 together with the original invoices for the imported goods.
It is alleged that, unknown to Mr Yang and ZIMRA, Bao forged and submitted alternative invoices in Mr Yang’s name showing lower values for the goods.
The alleged conduct resulted in ZIMRA receiving ZiG244 219 instead of the required ZiG454 369.
On the third count, the State alleges that in March 2026, Mr Yang imported goods attracting duty of ZiG439 369.
Bao was again engaged to facilitate payment to ZIMRA and allegedly advised the importer to provide US$22 210. He allegedly handed over the money to Bao on March 23 together with the original invoice for the imported goods.
The State alleges that Bao again submitted a different invoice to ZIMRA showing a lower value for the goods.
As a result, ZIMRA received ZiG246 672 instead of ZiG439 369.
The alleged underpayment was later detected by ZIMRA, which demanded the outstanding ZiG192 697 together with a 100 percent penalty of the same amount.
Mr Yang subsequently paid the outstanding duty and penalty, resulting in an alleged actual prejudice of ZiG192 697.
Nothing was recovered.
