- The case involves a complex that is used for both exempt rental income and taxable rental income.
- The taxpayer argues that there is a direct and immediate connection between the taxable rental of the roof and the purchase of the complex.
- The tax authority argues that the expenses for the complex were not made with the intention of the taxable rental of the roof.
- The court determines that the case is different from a previous ruling because it involves the purchase of an investment property, not a private residence.
- The taxpayer argues that the pro rata calculation should be based on the surface area of the roof.
- The tax authority argues that the pro rata calculation should be based on the revenue generated.
- The court determines that the taxpayer has not provided sufficient evidence to deviate from the revenue-based calculation.
- The taxpayer argues that the revenue-based calculation violates the principle of fiscal neutrality.
- The court determines that there is no violation of the principle of fiscal neutrality.
- The appeal is dismissed.
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.