According to the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal had insufficiently motivated its decision that the 39 VAT returns not mentioned in the indictment and the proven statement could be regarded as circumstances under which the five incorrect VAT returns referred to in the proven statement were made and that as a result the other reports showed the large-scale nature of the proven tax offenses
Source: futd.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Amsterdam Court of Appeal Confirms VAT Ruling on Supply of Magic Truffles as Foodstuffs
- End VAT Subsidy on Alcoholic Beverages in Composite Transactions: A Call for Legislative Action
- CDC Pension Fund Not a Common Investment Fund: No VAT Exemption for Management Services
- Reduced VAT Rate Not Applicable to Magic Truffles, Amsterdam Court Confirms
- Pension Fund Not Classified as Collective Investment Fund for VAT Exemption, Court Rules
