- The Supreme Court rules that X NV is guilty of gross negligence for wrongly deducting input tax and failing to file VAT supplements.
- X NV is involved in real estate operations and is subject to VAT, performing both taxable and exempt services.
- The inspector claims X NV wrongly deducts input tax attributable to exempt rentals.
- The Hague Court rules that the 25 percent penalties are justified due to X NV’s gross negligence.
- X NV argues that proof by presumption is insufficient after a specific court ruling in April 2022.
- The Supreme Court states that proof of gross negligence can still rely on presumption, but this was not the case here.
- It is undisputed that X NV is an experienced real estate operator and failed to organize its administration properly.
- The court’s judgment that X NV should have known the input tax was not deductible and failed to file supplements is not based on presumptions.
- The court’s decision on X NV’s gross negligence is not based on a misunderstanding of the term.
- X NV’s appeal is unfounded.
Source: taxlive.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.
