- The case involves a dispute over whether the change of declarations is possible and if it would result in a refund and the cancellation of the UTB.
- The court examines the regulations regarding the import of fish and the use of the special destination scheme.
- The court concludes that the use of the special destination scheme requires a permit, which the appellant did not have.
- The court states that the appellant’s request to change the declarations is only valid if it no longer involves declarations in their own name and for their own account, but as indirect representatives of the importer.
Source: uitspraken.rechtspraak.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"
- Rental of Workroom by Silent Partnership: Entrepreneurship Confirmed, VAT Deduction Denied Due to Private Use
- Court Rules Taxpayer Responsible for Late ICP Filing Despite Advisor’s Involvement
- Update on NCTS Disruption: Message Re-injection Delayed, Next Update Expected Tomorrow Morning
- Memorandum in response to the report on the Bill on the retention of a reduced VAT rate on culture, media and sport
- Netherlands Sets Out Four-Phase Plan for Implementing EU ViDA
