- X provided hockey training and theory lessons to students of a high school from 2015 to 2017
- In 2019, the Inspector conducted a tax audit and found that X did not charge VAT for the lessons
- The Inspector imposed VAT on the hockey lessons and on the private use of a car in 2015
- The Court of Appeal ruled that the Inspector violated the defense principle by not informing X in a timely manner of the intended corrections
- X could have provided input regarding the hockey lessons that may have led to a different decision, but was not given the opportunity to do so
- The VAT assessment on the hockey lessons was overturned, but the correction for private use of a car was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Source: nlfiscaal.nl
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.
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Payment Not Considered Compensation for Transfer of Generality of Goods, Article 37d Not Applicable
- Reduced VAT Rate Applies to Live Events Featuring Online Communities and Streamers, Court Rules
- Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over VAT Refund Requests for 2018; 2019 Claim Also Denied
- Netherlands to Increase Late Payment Interest Rate to 4.3% from January 2026
- Payment received: no compensation for transfer of totality of assets













