beta
추계조사결정사유에 해당하는지 여부(경정)

조세심판원 조세심판 | 2004-04-09 | 국심2003중1578 | 소득

[Case Number]

National High Court Decision 2003Du1578 (Law No. 104.10)

[Items]

Global Income

[Types of Decision]

Correction

[Summary of Decision]

It is determined by an estimated investigation where necessary account books, etc. are incomplete when calculating the tax base.

[Related Acts]

Article 70 of the Income Tax Act / [Final Return on Tax Base of Global Income] Article 143 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

【Disposition】

The imposition of global income tax for 200 won for 246,371,200 won for 200 and for 425,051,520 won for 201 for 2000 shall be determined by the standard income rate for each of the pertinent years, and the tax base and tax amount shall be corrected according to the estimation of the income amount for each of the pertinent years.

【Reasoning】

1. Summary of disposition;

On December 5, 1997, the claimant filed a return on the total amount of income tax belonging to 200 to 2001 with the business operator who runs the medical business (an agenda).

After conducting a tax investigation of the applicant's global income tax return for 200 to 2001, the disposition agency determined the applicant's income by the method of the on-site investigation and notified the applicant's income for 246,371,200 global income tax for 200 and 425,051,520 for 201.

The appellant appealed against this and filed the appeal on May 13, 2003.

2. Opinions of the claimant and disposition agency;

A. The claimant's assertion

(1) The disposition agency has determined the comprehensive income tax on the spot of 200 to 2001 by recording the detailed statement of the payment of medical expenses of the Medical Insurance Foundation, the purchase tax invoice file following the purchase of medical and medical expendable items, and other small cash disbursements in 200 to 2001. However, the miscellaneous captain is merely a small amount of cash expenditures prepared by several nurses among hospital expenses, and the payment ledger of personnel expenses is false, the monthly rent is reduced and the monthly rent was omitted, and the depreciation costs, food surgery brokerage, and domestic and overseas exit equipment were omitted, and the determination income rate on the average income rate (32% in 200, March 4, 200, March 201) was 75% in 200 and August 84, 201, in light of the average income rate (32% in 200, March 4, 200).

(2) In calculating the global income tax return, the claimant may choose the method of calculating the amount of income by the account book and the method of calculating the amount of income by the estimation method at the time of filing the return of income tax at the time of filing the return of global income tax, and where the return of income by the estimation method is filed, it cannot be reported as the method of filing the return of income at the time of filing the return of global income tax (tax 46101-172, Dec. 11, 2000; income 4601-31, Jan. 10, 2001), and where the initial decision or correction is determined by the estimation, the amount of income omitted thereafter shall also be subject to an additional investigation and correction (general Rule 80-1 of the Income Tax Act).

(b) Opinions of disposition agencies;

(1) The disposition agency, at the time of the commencement of the tax investigation, has secured and confirmed documentary evidence, such as cash receipt ledger by patient, wage payment ledger, source tax return ledger, purchase tax invoice file, rent, and other expenses payment of pharmaceutical products and medical expendable goods, and tax invoice file, cash recording, and cash recording, etc. The agency, at the time of the commencement of the tax investigation, determined the tax base and tax amount by the amount confirmed. The claimant asserts that the determined income rate is 75% in 200 and 84% in 2001, which cannot be socially accepted by sound social norms. However, since the simple profit rate excluding the fixed costs reaches 93.3%, the claim for the determination of the amount of income should be made by estimation is groundless.

(2) Pursuant to Article 80(3) of the Income Tax Act, the determination of the tax base and amount of tax must be based on accounting books and other documentary evidence, and the determination of the tax base and amount of tax can be exceptionally based on the proviso of Article 80(3) of the Income Tax Act and Article 143(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. Thus, in determining the tax base and amount of tax, it is unreasonable that the disposition agency should make the determination by the method of the initial return

3. Hearing and determination

(a) Points in dispute;

(1) The legitimacy of the claim claim determination that the disposition agency should make an on-site investigation determination on the ground that there are no books and documentary evidence or there are insufficient or false parts of the books and documentary evidence.

(2) The propriety of the determination of the on-site investigation by denying the estimated return of business income.

(b) Related statutes;

(1) The final return of global income Article 70 of the Income Tax Act shall be submitted to the chief of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment, along with the following documents:

6. If the real estate rental income amount or business income amount is not calculated on the basis of the books and documentary evidence kept and recorded under Articles 160 and 161, the estimate income account statement prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(2) If a person who has filed a final return on the tax base under Articles 70 through 72 or 74 falls under any of the following subparagraphs, the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the director of the regional tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall correct the tax base

1. Where an omission or error exists in the contents of return;

(3) Where the head of a regional tax office or the head of a regional tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment determines or revises the tax base and amount of tax in the current year under paragraphs (1) and (2), he shall make it based on the books and other documentary evidence: Provided, That if it is impossible to calculate the amount of income by books and other documentary evidence for

Article 143 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. (1) The term "reasons prescribed by the Presidential Decree" in the proviso of Article 80 (3) of the Act means cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where necessary account books and documentary evidence are missing or important parts are incomplete or false in the calculation of the tax base;

C. Facts and determination

(1) We examine the issues (1).

(A) When investigating the amount of income for the portion of the claimant's 200 to 2001, the disposition agency denies the applicant's global income tax return for the portion of the year 2000 to 2001, and determines 467,063,00 of the omitted amount by taking into account the insurance premium revenue data, the amount of food operation revenue according to the knife's knife usage, and the amount of medical fees, etc. as listed below, and confirmed 453,252,696 won by taking account of the tax invoice, transaction statement, wage payment ledger, small cash disbursement ledger, etc. kept by the claimant, and imposed this case by recognizing it as actual necessary expenses.

Annual revenue amount and necessary expenses statement

(unit: Won)

[1] 201: (1) 80,042,091, 451, 603, 603, 1982, 288, 288, 1901,086, 386, 3862, 1963, 204, 207, 217,067,063,0639, 2164, 1967, 1964, 1967, 2963, 2963, 204, 207, 1964, 1963, 207, 1964, 204, 205, 1964, 1963, 207, 1964, 196, 207, 379, 1964, 209, 2008, 4294, 2008,36307,36,39

(B) Upon examining the confirmation of the claimant and the nurse who has secured the agency's decision in the field investigation, the claimant filed a monthly report on the amount of monthly income in 2000 to 201, the claimant paid direct personnel expenses, received and kept a tax invoice and a transaction statement at the time of purchasing major materials such as pharmaceutical, medical equipment, and medical expendable expenses, and the small amount of expenses such as employee food service, etc., and recorded the food service and sirens in the revenue record book. The defendant recorded the food service and sirens in the medical set and the sirens. The revenue-related book has a daily revenue book, the daily revenue book, the other guard book (the food service, wage, medicine, daily supplies, and consumer goods), and the daily revenue book confirms that there is no separate record book.

(C) When the agency determines on-site investigation, it is confirmed that the depreciation costs for the fixed assets (the claimant submits a specification during the appeal) as listed below are not recognized as necessary expenses by settlement of accounts.

Details of fixed assets.

(won)

On the date of purchase of asset name, the acquisition value, undeductible balance, 882, 87173, 267, 661 vehicle transport equipment 27, 229.362, 2071, 083, 175 medical equipment 200.5 and 701, 700, 700, 70081, 200, 20026, 5026, 998596, 700, 20081, 200, 200, 200, 34,000, 66666, 408, 175 medical equipment

(D) On the other hand, if the disposition agency excludes purchase costs and personnel expenses based on the tax invoices, etc., which are recognized as necessary expenses, from among those recognized as necessary expenses, the amount additionally recognized as necessary expenses is merely 5 million won per annum by recording daily spending details. On the other hand, the claimant understates part of the insurance premiums and Class A labor income by reducing the value-added tax without receiving a tax invoice in order to reduce the burden of value-added tax, and there was no choice but to reduce rent from the lessee’s standpoint, and there was no proof that the amount actually paid, such as advertising expenses, entertainment expenses, medical examination and treatment fees, and labor expenses of the claimant instead of the claimant, is not recognized as necessary expenses. The claimant did not recognize depreciation costs as necessary expenses because it was not estimated as depreciation costs, and the disposition agency did not recognize it as necessary expenses due to the reasons that the amount of income should be calculated by deducting necessary expenses corresponding thereto from the total income amount, and if it is presumed that there is no other reflective evidence in light of the nature of the type of business, it is difficult for the claimant to receive necessary expenses (201 million won).

(ii)A dispute (ii) is exempt from the hearing because it has no benefit of the hearing.

4. Conclusion

This request for a trial is reasonable as a result of the review, so it is decided as per Disposition in accordance with Articles 81 and 65 (1) 3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

April 10, 2004

The chief judge shall admit the National Tax Judge

National Tax Judge Kim Do-type

Man National Tax Judge Kim Shin-Woo

National Tax Judge No. 50