According to the Supreme Court ‘it is illegitimate the rectification of the purchase value of the land if it is based solely on an appraisal of the Office: it is, in fact, an assessment that must be compared with any other evidence produced by the taxpayer’
As often happens, the Revenue Agency has considered not true the sales value, in this case, of a building plot in the light of a written report of the Territory Agency. Consequence: higher taxes, penalties and interest.
The taxpayer, reached by the notice of assessment, has appealed to the Tax Commission.
After losing the first and the second instance, the taxpayer had also lodged an appeal in the Supreme Court asserting that, among other, the appellate court had based its decision only on the expert report of the Revenue Agency.
The Supreme Court, in its judgment 10222/2016, recalled that the tax authority, in front of the court, is on the same floor of the taxpayer and therefore the land report, which had been prepared by the Territory Agency and then from an internal organ of the Revenue Agency, it is a technical report and not an official appraisal.
The court of second instance, says the Supreme Court, may base its decision only on the Revenue Agency's expertise but it must explain why this is ‘more correct and convincing’ than the ones produced by the taxpayer.
The ‘expert report’ of the Revenue Agency is only a test produced by one of the parties of the tax trial, and It has not, in itself, a higher worth than the documentation produced by the taxpayer.
We hope that this judgment of the Supreme Court ends a long row of notices of assessment based on ‘questionable expert report’.