Whether an additional tax can be imposed on a corporation exempted from a principal tax

No additional tax shall be imposed pursuant to Article 41 (7) of the Corporate Tax Act on farmland improvement cooperatives exempted from corporate tax under the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act because they failed to submit a payment report under Article 66 (2) and (4) of the Corporate Tax Act to the competent tax office.

Article 4(1) of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, Article 66(2) of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 66(4) of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 41(4) of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 41(7) of the Corporate Tax Act

National Farmland Improvement Association's interest system

Head of the Office of Government

Seoul High Court Decision 72Gu597 delivered on October 17, 1973

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the defendant imposed corporate tax of 407,717 won on the plaintiff as of June 9, 1972 and that the plaintiff did not dispute between the parties to the corporation established under the Agricultural Community Modernization Promotion Act, and that the above taxation disposition is imposed as above on the plaintiff on the ground that the plaintiff failed to submit a payment report under Article 66 (2) and (4) of the Corporate Tax Act to the Government, on the ground that the plaintiff submitted a payment report under Article 66 (2) and (4) of the Corporate Tax Act, but the plaintiff did not perform its duty to submit it, and therefore, the plaintiff corporation is exempted from corporate tax and business tax on its income under Article 4 (1) 21 of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, so it cannot be imposed on the plaintiff who failed to submit each report to the head of the competent tax office under Article 66 (2) and (4) of the Corporate Tax Act as alleged by the defendant, and therefore, it cannot be viewed that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles and the relevant laws.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as 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 Justices.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)