[종합소득세부과처분취소][공1981.2.1.(649),13467]
The case holding that even if the book under the Income Tax Act is not kept, it shall not be based on the method of estimated investigation.
Even if a book under the Income Tax Act is not kept and kept, if the income which serves as the tax base can be calculated based on other evidential documents such as contract, the tax base and tax amount shall be determined by the method of on-site investigation and shall not be determined by the method of
Article 184 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 3015, Dec. 19, 197)
Supreme Court Decision 80Nu135 Delivered on September 24, 1980
[Judgment of the court below]
Head of Eastern Tax Office
Seoul High Court Decision 80Gu73 delivered on July 15, 1980
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.
According to the court below's reasoning that the sub-lease contract (No. 9) entered into with the plaintiff 1 is a copy of the contract without the contract date, and that the defendant asked the plaintiff that the non-party 2 carries on business by telephone around September 28, 1979, that is, the sub-lease contract presented by the plaintiff is unclear, and the defendant does not investigate the tax base and tax amount of the plaintiff 78 years based on documentary evidence presented by the plaintiff for the reason that the pre-lease contract is less than the pre-lease price of the neighboring store, and the pre-lease price under the same contract is also low in value than the pre-lease price of the neighboring store, and the defendant did not withhold the documents presented by the plaintiff for the year of 78 years of income of the neighboring real estate owner as the tax base for the pre-lease contract (see Article 118 (2) 16 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, which is the basis for calculating the amount of income of the plaintiff's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 2's book.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Kim Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)