[부가가치세부과처분취소][공1986.6.1.(777),769]
The burden of proving the legitimacy of the estimated taxation
The tax authorities are responsible for proving that the existence of the basis for the estimation, the method of the estimation, and the content of the estimation are reasonable and reasonable reflecting the actual amount of income in the case where the legitimacy of the taxation disposition due to the estimation is disputed.
Article 21 (2) of the Value-Added Tax Act
Supreme Court Decision 85Nu62 Decided July 9, 1985 83Nu210 Decided May 29, 1984
[Judgment of the court below]
The Director of Gangnam District Office
Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu1189 delivered on December 23, 1985
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
If there is a reason under the proviso of Article 21(2) of the Value-Added Tax Act, the government may estimate the tax base of value-added tax and the amount of tax payable by estimation under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. However, in order to calculate the amount by the method of partner's right, the account books shall be calculated by the type of right with other partners of the same business that has not been corrected in accordance with the provisions of Article 21(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act because the account books are deemed justifiable in accordance with the provisions of Article 69(1)1 of the same Act, in good faith, and if there is a dispute over the legitimacy of the taxation disposition by estimation correction, the government shall return to the tax authorities the burden of proving that the reason for estimation exists, the method of estimation
Therefore, the court below's decision on the ground that the tax base reported at the time of the final return of value-added tax for the second period of February 1983 (store sale price) was remarkably low compared to the actual sale price in neighboring stores, the defendant's disposition that determined the tax base amount and tax amount as illegal on the ground that the defendant's estimation method under Article 69 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Ownership and Ownership of New Buildings, the opening price, and the opening price of the three buildings was selected and the amount of tax calculated on the basis of the average sale price of the three buildings, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone cannot recognize the existence of the estimation reason or the rationality and validity of the estimation method, and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice) Gangwon-young Kim Young-ju