조세심판원 조세심판 | 1990-01-19 | 국심1989서2118 | 부가
National High Court Decision 1989Du2118 ( October 19, 1990)
According to the details of outsourcing processing costs and tax invoices, etc., in the case of 88 years, the livelihood support group was not dispatched in the case of 88 years, and the increase in the cost of outsourcing processing compared to that of 87 years is caused by the increase in the cost of outsourcing processing costs and the increase in the processing process of other products. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the applicant corporation sold the issue source itself to the non-claim corporation itself.
Article 81 of the Framework Act on National Taxes 【Application Mutatis Mutandis of Provisions
89 years in which the director of the tax office determines and notifies the requesting corporation as of June 16, 89.
disposition of value-added tax of KRW 19,507,90 at any time, the transaction of this case
The tax base and the amount of tax shall be corrected by changing the original death.
1. Claim assertion
The requesting corporation is a corporation that has its address in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government OOOOOO and supplies raw materials produced by purchasing raw materials without manufacturing factories and entrusting processing to a pregnant factory to the exporting company, etc. without manufacturing factories, and the requesting corporation purchased raw materials from OO or theory in 88.2 years from the requesting corporation in 87 and carried forward in 88 years from NYO SPK 70DE 13,095 KG and NYONS 100D 10, 773KG 23,868 KG 23,868 (hereinafter referred to as "intersiwon") confirmed that the requesting corporation filed a claim for the return and sale of raw materials to the requesting corporation and filed a claim for the return and sale of raw materials to the non-claim corporation 90,05, 205, 205, 207, 97, 97, 90,000 OOOOMMO.
The applicant filed a request for judgment on October 31, 89, 89.10, by filing a request for review on August 14, 89., arguing that there was no fact that the support group was sold, although the respondent had received it to OO in the year of 88 due to the fact that it was a continuous transaction with OO or Japan Co., Ltd., Ltd., a fixed purchase agent.
2. Opinions of the Commissioner of the National Tax Service;
In the case of this recommendation, the disposal agency conducted a inventory inspection while conducting a revised assessment of the value-added tax for the 88.2 period of the 89.6.2 period for the 88.2 period for the applicant company, it was confirmed that the actual inventory of the original contractor 23,868K company 70DE 13,095K and NYOO S-D3K company 10,773K company 10DE 10,868 KG company 23,868 KG company 23,868 KG company 23,868G company 23,868 company 20, the representative director of the applicant company 23,868G company 205,971D 650 won for the production of the unit price for the 13,81,150O company 70D company 70D company 13,095G company and 23,818.
This proposal dispute is to judge whether the applicant corporation was omitted in sales or not, or whether the respondent was omitted in sales or not as NYON SATIN INGREY*.
4. Hearing and determination
Inasmuch as the applicant corporation purchased from OO or theory in the 87 year of claim and kept them in the O or O or 200,000 won in the 888 year of claim, there is no direct facility in the case of the applicant corporation, and there is no dispute between the disposition authority and the claimant for the purchase of the O or 200,000 won in the case of the 888 year of claim, the O or 280,000 won in the case of the O or 200,000 won in the 87 year of claim, the O or 2880,000 won in the case of the O or 208 year of supply of the O or 130,000 won in the case of the O or 208 year of supply of the O or 208,000 won in the case of the 13,200,000 won in the case of the 8888 year of supply of the O or 2885% of supply of the O or more.
On the other hand, first of all, according to the notice of taxation data of the disposition authority that the claimant corporation moved into the NAYON SINININININGGREY*, and sold on credit to the OOY corporation outside the claim, the director of the tax office at the tax office at the tax office at the tax office at the tax office at the tax office at the tax office at the tax office, the result of the investigation on OOT
First, Co., Ltd. did not purchase NYON SATIN INGREHHHE
Second, it is confirmed that the applicant company purchased a key source from the applicant company and produced the NYO SAT SIN IN INGREY* 147,271 YD was confirmed by the production report and production rate survey kept in the OO goods in the corporation, and it is confirmed that there was no other commodities stored and stored in our company to be dismissed except for the key source company;
Next, according to the details and tax invoices of outsourcing processing costs submitted by the applicant corporation, it can be known that it was caused by the increase in the cost of outsourcing processing costs and the increase in the processing process due to the increase in other products in many other products for the year 88.
Therefore, it is judged that it is more consistent with the facts to view that the claimant corporation sold the issue director itself to the OO corporation outside the claim.
Since a request for a trial is deemed to be well-grounded as a result of the review, it shall be decided as ordered under Articles 81 and 65(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.