[부가가치세등부과처분취소][집33(3)특,476;공1986.2.1.(769),261]
The tax authority shall determine double the income-standard rate for each type of business by internal practice as the total profit rate, and whether the estimation of value-added tax is appropriate for the correction thereof.
If the tax authority calculated on the basis of the gross profit ratio of sales under Article 69 (1) 4 (d) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, but the gross profit ratio applied by the tax authority was set twice by the internal practice of the tax authority without any specific ground, the above gross profit ratio cannot be deemed as the calculation method based on the reasonable and reasonable ground, and thus, the estimation adjustment based on such gross profit ratio is unlawful.
Article 69 (1) 4 (d) of the Enforcement Decree of the Tax Act
Plaintiff
Head of the Cleanness Tax Office
Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu406 delivered on May 29, 1985
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
1. We examine the grounds of appeal by the defendant litigation performer.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below ruled that the defendant imposed value-added tax on the plaintiff for the first term portion of 1980 (for the first term portion of 80 years and second term portion, it is obvious that the judgment of the court below is a clerical error) with knowledge that the plaintiff discontinued his business on September 30, 1979. In light of the records, the above judgment below is justified, and there is no evidence to support the fact that the plaintiff voluntarily reported the special consumption tax for the first term portion of 1980, such as the theory of lawsuit
2. We examine the second ground for appeal.
When the tax base of a value-added tax is estimated, it shall be determined by a reasonable and reasonable estimate correction method so as to reflect the amount close to the actual amount as much as possible.
According to Article 69 (1) 4 (d) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, one of the estimated settlement methods is the method of calculating based on the total trading profit ratio set by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service or the director of the regional tax office for each business type. The above total trading profit ratio shall not be calculated based on reasonable and reasonable grounds so that the amount corresponding to the actual trading profit in the business type may be reflected.
In this case, according to the facts duly established by the court below, the defendant calculated the total profit ratio under Article 69 (1) 4 (d) of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act in the course of making the reorganization of this case, but 24% of the total profit ratio applied by the defendant was set annually by the internal practices of the tax authorities without any specific grounds. In light of these facts, the above total profit ratio cannot be deemed to be the calculation method based on the reasonable and reasonable grounds, and therefore, the court below's decision was just in holding that the above internal practices of the National Tax Service were unlawful, and there was no evidence to prove that the above internal practices of the National Tax Service were established as a practice under Article 18 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.
There is no reason to discuss this issue.
3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Park Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)