The VAT dispute for the February 2015 tax period between PT. BASF Indonesia (BI) and the DGT sets a crucial precedent regarding the supremacy of material evidence over formal administrative compliance. The conflict centered on export corrections based on the DGT-DGCE portal data and the rejection of Input Tax due to Tax Invoice Serial Numbers (NSFP) deemed to precede the official issuance date by tax authorities. The Respondent argued that administrative non-compliance under PER-24/PJ/2012 rendered the invoices formally flawed and non-creditable. Conversely, BI maintained that the transactions were authentic, VAT had been paid through the purchase price, and a vendor's administrative error should not invalidate the credit rights of a bona fide buyer.
In its deliberation, the Board of Judges adopted a progressive stance by invoking the principle of lex superiori derogat legi inferiori. The Court emphasized that Article 9, paragraph (8) of the VAT Law exhaustively limits the criteria for non-creditable Input Tax, and administrative failures regarding NSFP are not included. Resolutively, the Court overturned the Input Tax corrections as BI successfully demonstrated convincing cash and goods flows.
Regarding the export dispute, the Court conducted a thorough examination of invoices and bank statements, resulting in the cancellation of most corrections as they were proven to be legitimate overseas deliveries. This analysis highlights that robust internal source documents remain a taxpayer's primary defense against third-party data. The ruling implies the necessity of legal protection for buyers against vendor administrative errors beyond their control.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id