The activities of VOF X consisted of the purchase, sale and repair of jewelery and the purchase, sale and processing of precious metals. In addition, jewelry was also offered for sale via a website.
According to the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, VOF X has not complied with the administrative obligations of article 34, paragraph 1, of the Tax Law. To this end, the Court refers in particular to the presence in the records of forged or summarily drawn up purchase receipts, the non-regular updating of cash receipts and the inadequate administration of the flow of goods. As a result, VOF X does not, at least insufficiently, keep a regular record of (1) the purchase statements issued by it, as well as of (2) the expenditure and receipts with regard to the deliveries of goods and services provided by it.
Source BTW jurisprudentie
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- No VAT Deduction on Apartment Purchase: Mixed Residential and Business Use Confirmed
- Low VAT Rate for Culture, Media, and Sports Maintained After Positive Implementation Test
- EU Advocate General: Loyalty Points Not Free for VAT Purposes in Lyko Case
- Advisor’s Recommendation on VAT-Exempt Staff Provision: No Penalty Imposed by Court
- No Reduced VAT Rate for Photo Mosaics and Contour Collages, Court Rules
