- A BV, a contracting company, faced additional VAT assessments and an offense fine for 2012-2014, despite a 2014 tax audit report promising acceptance of deducted input VAT unless A BV knew of subcontractor non-payment, with the Tax and Customs Administration alleging failure to apply reverse charge and negligence regarding dishonest subcontractors.
- The dispute centered on the admissibility of A BV’s late appeal and, substantively, whether the principle of legitimate expectations precluded the additional assessments, with the Tax and Customs Administration arguing contra legem and EU law incompatibility, citing the Nigl judgment.
- The Court of Appeal of The Hague declared the appeal admissible and ruled that applying the principle of legitimate expectations was not contrary to EU law in this case, citing various Supreme Court and CJEU judgments; it found the Tax and Customs Administration failed to prove A BV’s awareness of non-payment, thus upholding A BV’s reliance on the assurance and largely overturning the additional assessments, except for a small amount of wrongly invoiced VAT after the inspection report date.
Source BTW Jurisprudentie
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- VAT Margin Scheme Did Not Apply to the Sale of White Goods Purchased in Germany
- Additional VAT Assessment for Private Use of Company Cars Upheld, but Penalty Reduced
- Office-to-Hotel Conversion Does Not Create a Newly Manufactured Building for VAT Purposes
- Margin Scheme Cannot Apply to Returned Goods Where Input VAT Was Deducted
- VAT Assessment for Private Use of Company Cars; Penalty Reduced from 80% to 25%
