- X is a holding company that holds investments and makes investments.
- Y is a cafeteria and ice cream parlor that rents a property, including inventory, from X.
- The dispute is whether X, Y, and Z form a fiscal unity for VAT purposes.
- The court rules that X and Y form a fiscal unity as of December 1, 2020, but Z does not belong to it.
- The tax inspector fails to prove that there are non-negligible relations between Z and X and Y.
- Due to Mr. A being the indirect director of X and Y, they are under joint management, indicating organizational interdependence.
- The rental of the property, including inventory, also establishes non-negligible economic relations between X and Y.
- Therefore, X and Y form a fiscal unity for VAT purposes.
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.