- After a tax audit, the inspector imposed VAT reassessments on BV X for April–December 2018 and all of 2019, plus 10% default penalties.
- The inspector found part of the claimed input VAT was insufficiently supported by invoices, and some invoices did not clearly show whether the costs were business-related or private expenses of the director-shareholder.
- BV X argued it was entitled to full VAT deduction because the invoices existed and the services were supplied to it.
- The Zeeland-West-Brabant District Court rejected BV X’s claim, leaving the VAT reassessments and penalties in place.
Source: futd.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"
- No reliance on tax adviser where VAT invoices were not provided on time
- No VAT Invoice Filing, No Appeal to the Adviser
- Export VAT Zero Rate for Horse Sale Upheld Despite Delayed EU Exit
- Pension Fund Not Qualifying as Common Investment Fund, VAT Exemption Denied
- VAT’s Impact on Dutch WOZ Property Valuation
