Durban : The fraud and corruption trial of businessman Schabir Shaik became entangled in a threeway argument yesterday about the admissibility of his tax submissions and the applicability of secrecy clauses in tax legislation.

The secrecy provision of SA's tax legislation prevents the South African Revenue Service (SARS) from revealing details of the tax position of taxpayers.

The legislation is intended to protect taxpayers' privacy and commercial confidentiality.

The state hopes to lead evidence on Shaik's myriad companies in an attempt to prove an alternate fraud charge but presenting the evidence would run contrary to secrecy clauses.

SARS legal counsel Peter Olsen told the court that his client was not opposing the admission of the evidence, but neither was it supporting it.

A specific court order w ould be necessary if an exception to the secrecy provisions was to apply, Olsen said.

The state argued that a court order was not necessary.

In turn, the defence argued that not only was a court order necessary, but that the judge should order against evidence on Shaik's tax affairs being heard.

Earlier in the day, the court heard from Tracy O'Brien, who had sub-let her Durban beachfront flat to Shaik.

O'Brien said that she had heard that Deputy President Jacob Zuma had moved into the flat from members of the body corporate when they complained about there being bodyguards with guns in the complex.

She said Shaik had not informed her about the change of occupant, as he was required to do in terms of the lease.

O'Brien also complained about the rent being "always late", although she said it was always eventually paid.

With acknowledgements to Tim Cohen and the Business Day.