The fact that, according to X, the immovable property was actually used for other purposes, such as storage, did not make this different. As to the second requirement, the Court ruled that X had not excluded the use of the immovable property as parking space in the lease agreement.
Source:
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- No newly manufactured good in the event of conversion of office building into hotel: concurrence exemption does not apply
- General practitioner does not perform VAT-exempt services for local foundation
- Court of Appeal ‘s-Hertogenbosch Ruling on Transfer and Turnover Tax Dispute, July 30, 2025
- Avoid Penalties: Timely Third Quarter VAT Filing for Dutch BV Companies in October
- Despite substantial investments in the conversion of office into hotel, no new building
