- Inspector claims that input tax deducted by X is related to non-business expenses
- Corrected VAT in housing, sales, and office costs for 2013 and 2014
- X did not sufficiently prove the business nature of most costs
- Input tax on representation costs not deductible under Article 15, paragraph 5, VAT Act 1968
- Use of iPads for business purposes not adequately proven for third iPad
- Court ruled that the assessments were not too high and dismissed the appeal
- Case heard by the Court of Den Bosch on July 10, 2024
- VAT period: 2013-2014
- Case numbers: 22/1031; 22/1032; 22/1033
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"
- VAT Liability of Dutch Kadaster’s Tactical Management Services for DSO-LV under Economic Activity Criteria
- Court Divided on VAT Abuse: Car Sales to Directors at Below-Market Prices and Tax Implications
- Dutch Supreme Court: Abuse of Law in VAT on Underpriced Car Sale by Holding Company to DGA
- Dutch Supreme Court Rejects VAT Refund Appeal; Lower Court Ruling Upheld Without Further Explanation
- Netherlands Raises VAT on Short-Stay Accommodation to 21% Effective January 2026
