- The case involves VAT and the right to deduct VAT paid by a private company for legal assistance costs provided to its director.
- The court determined that the facts did not require the judgments previously mentioned.
- The court independently established facts necessary for applying specific articles and denied the requested deduction, exceeding the legal dispute.
- The Secretary of State argued that the Inspector should not be bound by withdrawing his position on the application of the BUA.
- The court’s judgment was based on an incorrect legal interpretation, and the appeal was successful.
- The incidental appeal by the Secretary of State cannot lead to cassation, and the Supreme Court does not need to provide reasoning for this decision.
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.
