logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.07.04 2013구합65106
취득세등부과처분취소
Text

1. The head of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the head of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and Seoul Metropolitan Government;

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs, as general urban gas business entities under the Urban Gas Business Act, performed gas pipes construction from October 2007 to June 2012, 146-6, Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and acquired such gas pipes and paid acquisition tax, etc. on the basis of construction costs, etc.

B. As a result of conducting a tax investigation with respect to the plaintiffs, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City determined that the portion borne by the urban gas user out of the construction cost of artificial pipes and gas blocking devices when the plaintiffs reported and paid acquisition tax, etc. for gas pipes, road user fees, charges borne by road restoration (road packing construction cost), and facility contributions were omitted from the tax base, and notified the defendants of taxation

Accordingly, the defendants imposed and collected acquisition tax (including additional tax) and special rural development tax (including additional tax) on the plaintiffs as stated in the attached Table 1.

(2) In addition to the disposition of imposition of acquisition tax and special tax for rural development against the Plaintiffs as shown in the separate sheet No. 1, the main tax and additional tax related to the seal pipelines stated in the separate sheet No. 2 and the additional tax related to the cost of road packing construction (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).

The Plaintiffs appealed against the disposition of the remaining Defendants except for the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul Metropolitan Government”) and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal.

The Tax Tribunal decided to correct the tax base and tax amount by excluding the facility contributions from the tax base.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2 and 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The case.

arrow