The tax dispute involving PT UBS centers on the debate over the application of the "Other Value" Tax Base (DPP) for gold jewelry deliveries under PMK-30/PMK.03/2014. The Respondent (DJP) issued a significant correction of IDR 35.5 billion, claiming that the transactions were not raw material exchange mechanisms (24K gold) but rather full-manufacture jewelry sales. The tax authority argued that the lack of detailed customer identities and the presence of production "loss" invalidated the Taxpayer's right to use the lower Tax Base rate stipulated in Article 4 paragraph (2) of the regulation.
The core of the conflict in the trial revolved around the burden of proof and administrative interpretation of transaction documents. The Respondent demanded rigid formal evidence, such as customer ID cards (KTP) and CCTV footage, while PT UBS asserted that all commercial documents, including Purchase Orders, Invoices, and Gold Bullion Receipts, complied with industry standards. The Petitioner argued that Article 4 paragraph (2) of PMK-30/2014 does not explicitly require customer ID cards as an absolute prerequisite for using the tax base mechanism of selling price minus the cost of 24K gold content.
The Board of Judges resolved the case by emphasizing the material facts found during the on-site inspection (descente). The judges found that PT UBS possessed the actual infrastructure to support exchange transactions, including specialized safes for pure gold and gold purity testing equipment (XRF). The Board opined that the Respondent's argument regarding "production loss" as a barrier to the exchange mechanism was technically flawed, as gold weight loss is an inevitability in any manufacturing process and does not alter the nature of a raw material exchange transaction.
This analysis shows that the Board of Judges prioritized the principle of substance over form. The ruling confirms that as long as the Taxpayer can prove the physical existence of 24K gold materials received from customers and maintains a traceable (audited) accounting system, unilateral corrections based solely on incomplete formal customer identities cannot be upheld. Consequently, the gold industry gains legal certainty that the "Other Value" Tax Base for jewelry manufacturing services remains applicable as long as material evidence exists.
In conclusion, PT UBS's victory in this case serves as a vital precedent for the gold jewelry industry facing VAT audits. The key lesson is the importance of maintaining the integrity of goods flow documentation and ensuring the readiness of operational infrastructure during on-site inspections by the Board of Judges to prove the economic substance of transactions.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id