Legal certainty for bona fide buyers of taxable goods or services is reaffirmed through the flow of funds and flow of goods tests as evidence of transaction materiality. The Respondent's correction of Input Tax, based solely on "No Record" confirmation responses, is overturned when the Taxpayer proves that the VAT burden was actually transferred and settled.
The dispute arose when the Respondent corrected PT TKI's Input Tax because the counterparty had not reported the Tax Invoices in their VAT returns. The Respondent insisted that, according to technical regulations on tax invoice confirmation, credits are only permitted if the tax has been reported and paid by the issuer. Conversely, PT TKI, as the Petitioner, countered by presenting bank transfer records covering the VAT amount, emphasizing that reporting obligations are beyond their control as a buyer.
The Board of Judges took a progressive stance, referencing Article 33 of the KUP Law regarding Joint Liability. The Board stated that the essence of VAT collection is the shifting of the tax burden. If the buyer has paid the VAT to the seller, the obligation to settle that tax has shifted to the seller. The seller's negligence in reporting VAT should not eliminate the buyer's constitutional right to credit that Input Tax, provided the transaction is genuine.
The resolution of this case demonstrates that evidence of money flow through bank statements and evidence of goods receipt are crucial evidentiary instruments in court. This decision strengthens legal protection for compliant Taxpayers against the risks of third-party non-compliance. In conclusion, Input Tax credits should not be contingent upon the administrative behavior of counterparties once the tax payment has been materially verified.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id