The movable property had not been physically moved in the context of the transfer and the business activities of BV D had not changed. It followed that BV D had fully continued its economic activity/enterprise and had therefore not (partially) transferred it, so that there could therefore be no question of a transfer of (part of an) company to X within the meaning of Section 37d of the VAT Act.
Source: futd.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Supreme Court Ruling on Classification of Non-Toxic Insecticides Under Tariff Heading 3808 GN
- Court Upholds €53,293 Tax Assessment for 246 kg Untaxed Tobacco Found in Rented Warehouse
- VAT Deduction on Home Office Construction Allowed Despite Limited Private Use, Court Rules
- Court Upholds Inspector’s Rejection of Untimely VAT Refund Objection for 2019 Tax Year
- Creator royalty fee on resale NFT is subject to VAT
