The court examined whether the taxpayer’s request for VAT refund or revision was submitted within the six-week statutory deadline. Finding that the request was not timely filed, the court determined that it could not rule on the taxpayer’s eligibility for a VAT refund. Additionally, the court concluded that the taxpayer was not entitled to compensation for non-material damages as the reasonable time limit had not been exceeded. The court explained its decision and outlined the implications. The taxpayer failed to provide sufficient evidence that [Company 2] did not claim the invoiced VAT amount as a deduction and that the invoiced amount was never paid in 2017. Consequently, the court upheld the tax authority’s decision to declare the request inadmissible. Therefore, the court was unable to assess the taxpayer’s entitlement to a VAT refund or revision. Moreover, the court clarified that, although the taxpayer filed an appeal against a decision made under tax legislation, it was not a decision subject to objection and appeal procedures. As such, the court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the administrative decision based on Article 65 of the General Tax Act, as there is no provision for objection or appeal against an ex officio tax reduction. The civil court retains residual jurisdiction in such cases.
Source: rechtspraak.nl
