Die gevolge van 'n belastingpligtige se handelinge word binne die belastingreg beoordeel aan die hand van verskillende maatstawwe. Die maatstaf van doel word deur die Wetgewer by die klassifikasie van die belastingpligtige se handelinge by die toepassing van verskeie belastingreëls voorgeskryf. Die howe het oak by geleentheid die maatstaf van doel by die interpretasie van verskeie belastingreëls, waar dit nie uitdruklik voorgeskryf is nie, toegepas. Verskeie vertakkinge van die reg onderskei tussen motief, doel en bedoeling wannear die maatstaf van doel of bedoeling toegepas moet word. Hierdie begrippe is by die interpretasie van verskeie belastingreëls, waar die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel voorgeskryf word, ingevoer. Sommige kenners meen dat 'n soortgelyke onderskeiding nie in die belastingreg tuishoort nie. Die doel van hierdie ondersoek was om, met verwysing na die betekenis en toepassing. van die begrippe, motief, doel en bedoeling in ander regsvertakkinge, die betekenis en toepassing daarvan in die Suid-Afrikaanse belastingreg vas te stel. Met ander woorde, die ondersoek behoort aan te toon of 'n onderskeiding tussen motief, doel en bedoeling in die belastingreg toegepas word, en indien dit nie toe gepas word nie, of dit wei nuttig toegepas kan word. Verder is gepoog om die beperkings van en noodsaaklikheid vir die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel in die belastingreg vas te stel. Dit blyk uit die ondersoek dat die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel by die toepassing van bepaalde belastingreëls nag nie gesuiwer is nie en dat dit lei tot regsonsekerheid en onbillikheid. Verder blyk dit duidelik uit die ondersoek dat die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel wei gesuiwer kan word deur die betekenisse van die begrippe, motief, doel en bedoeling te onderskei en gevolglik korrek toe te pas. In die laaste plek toon die ondersoek aan dat die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel in die belastingreg deur verskeie faktore beperk word, maar dat die toepassing daarvan om verskeie redes noodsaaklik is. Daar word aanbeveel dat die Wetgewer kennis moet neem van die betekenisse van die begrippe motief, doel en bedoeling en 'n vermenging daarvan by die formulering van belastingreëls moet vermy. Dit sal 'n bydrae lewer tot eenvoudiger interpretasie van die betrokke reëls asook 'n meer korrekte toepassing daarvan op die handelinge van die belastingpligtige. Verder behoort die howe nie die onderskeiding van motief, doel en bedoeling by die toepassing van die maatstaf van doel, by die uitleg van belastingreëls te vermy nie. Dit sal onsekerheid en onbillikheid met betrekking tot die toepassing van die betrokke reëls verhoed. ENGLISH : The Income Tax Law in South Africa requires that a taxpayer's actions or transactions are to be classified Qudged) with reference to various criteria. The Legislature requires the application of the criterium of purpose to classify a taxpayer's activities and transactions in terms of various tax rules. Even the Courts applied the criterium of purpose in the interpretation of various tax rules where the criteria has not been specifically required by the legislature. Various branches of the law distinguishes between motive, purpose and intention where the criteria of purpose or intention are required to classify activities. The study indicated that various learned writers are of the opinion that a similar distinction cannot be applied in the Income Tax Law of South Africa. The purpose of this study was to determine the meaning of motive, purpose and intention within the South African Income Tax Law by studying the meaning of the words as they are used in other branches of the law. In other words, the result of the study should indicate whether a similar distinction between motive, purpose and intention is applied in the Income Tax Law and if not, whether such a distinction can be applied in the Income Tax Law. Furthermore, the limitations and necessity of the application of the criteria of purpose in the Income Tax Law was determined. The study indicated that the application of the criterium of purpose in the interpretation of various tax rules had not been clearly distinguished and defined. This fact leads to uncertainty and unfairness in the application of these tax rules. It also became apparent that the application of the criteria of motive, purpose and intention could be more clearly defined and distincted in order to lead to more certain and fair application of income tax rules. Lastly, the study indicated that the application of the criteria of purpose and intention in the Income Tax Law are being limited by various factors but that the application thereof in the Income Tax Law are, because of various reasons, inevitable. It is proposed that the Legislature must take cognisance of the meaning of the criteria of motive, purpose and intention in other branches of the law and that the correct distinction in the formulating of tax rules must be applied. This will contribute to a more just interpretation of the various tax rules as well as a more proper application thereof in the classification of the taxpayer's actions or transactions. Furthermore, it is proposed that the Courts, in the interpretation of the various tax rules, should not avoid to distinguish between motive, purpose and intention. This will have the result that uncertainty and unfairness will be reduced in the application of the various tax rules. Copyright / Dissertation (MCom)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Auditing / Unrestricted