실지거래가액을 확인할 수 없는 경우에 해당하여 기준시가로 양도가액 산정한 것은 적법함[국승]
Suwon District Court 201Guhap1066 ( October 04, 2011)
early 2010 Heavy2174 ( December 13, 2010)
If the actual transaction price cannot be confirmed, it is legitimate to calculate the transfer price based on the standard market price.
(As with the judgment of the court of first instance), it is difficult to deem that a sales contract is reliable in light of the following: (a) a sales contract submitted at the time of the declaration is not accompanied by a special agreement; (b) the special agreement is disputed about disposal; and (c) the acquisition value in the financial statements of the purchasing company is written differently from the sales price in the contract; and (d) there is no mentioning
Article 96 of the Income Tax Act
2011Nu37659 Revocation of disposition of revocation of capital gains tax rectification notice
XX
Head of the Pakistan Tax Office
District Court Decision 2011Guhap1066 Decided October 4, 2011
January 18, 2012
February 29, 2012
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 1,630,632,020 against the Plaintiff on November 2, 2009 shall be revoked.
The reasoning for the judgment of the court with respect to this case is as follows. Since the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be written.
- - The following:
O 2nd 11th : 'Il. 4, 2009' D' January 2, 2009
O 2 - 600,893,300 won in total as the purchase price of the instant land is stated in the sales contract dated February 16, 2006, and even according to the sales contract dated February 16, 2006, the sales price of the instant land is calculated as KRW 7,601,580,000 in total, even if it is in accordance with the sales contract of February 16, 2006.
The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The appeal filed by the Plaintiff is dismissed as it is groundless.