The ‘s-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal ruled that the inspector violated the principle of defense regarding the additional assessment related to VAT-taxed hockey lessons provided by Entrepreneur X. The inspector did not inform X or his advisor in a timely and explicit manner about the intended additional assessments, and did not provide sufficient detail about the elements underlying the additional assessment. This lack of communication violated X’s right to defend himself.
Source Taxlive
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Guide to Netherlands Article 23 VAT Deferment: Benefits, Application, and Compliance for Online Sellers
- No VAT Deduction for Luxury Apartment Purchase: Business Use Not Proven, Court Rules
- Rental of Workroom by Silent Partnership: Entrepreneurship Confirmed, VAT Deduction Denied Due to Private Use
- Court Overturns Tax Office Decision on VAT Deduction for Healthcare Complex Development
- Netherlands Prepares for 2030 VAT Reforms: E-Invoicing, Platform Economy and SME Considerations
