[개인영업세부과처분취소][공1980.5.15.(632),12749]
Case where a decision of estimation of tax base is legitimate
In the event that the plaintiff does not keep account books and documentary evidence that can recognize the transaction amount, it is legitimate to estimate the plaintiff's business tax base amount by adding the amount equivalent to the business extension rate of the same kind of business to the amount of the previous business tax base of the previous business place.
Article 34 of the Business Tax Act; Article 77 of the Enforcement Decree of the Business Tax Act
[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1
Head of Yongsan Tax Office
Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu331 delivered on October 30, 1979
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The Plaintiff’s grounds of appeal are examined (the grounds of appeal on the remainder of the submission period are to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief).
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since Article 77 (1) 1, etc. of the former Enforcement Decree of the Business Tax Act provides that if there are no necessary account books or documentary evidence in calculating the tax base for the previous rice sales business, or there is no significant portion of such account books or documentary evidence, the court below determined that the plaintiff did not keep account books or documentary evidence of 22,572,907 won at a joint market for agricultural products during the taxation period of this case, and that the plaintiff did not keep account books or documentary evidence of 70 meters in calculating the tax base for the previous rice sales business under Article 77 (1) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Business Tax Act, it is clear that the court below's determination that the above amount of tax base for the previous rice sales business should be 0 meters away from the previous business place under the premise that the plaintiff had no such account books or documentary evidence of 70 meters prior to the determination of the tax base for the previous business place under Article 77 (1) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Business Tax Act.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Kim Yoon-Jeng (Presiding Justice)