The Absence of the 3rd Sheet of Tax Payment Slips is Not Grounds for VAT Reclassification by the DGT.

PT SGN VAT Dispute: Rejection of Delivery Status Reclassification and Vendor Liability Protection

The dispute originated from an audit of PT SGN, which resulted in a significant correction involving the reclassification of VAT delivery status from "Collected by VAT Collectors" to "Self-Collected." The core conflict arose when the Respondent (DGT) insisted that without physical evidence of the 3rd sheet of the Tax Payment Slip (SSP) from the Oil & Gas Contractors (KKKS), the VAT was deemed not yet remitted to the state treasury. Consequently, the DGT attempted to shift the payment liability back to the Appellant as the vendor. However, the Appellant firmly argued that as a vendor to a KKKS, their legal obligation was strictly limited to issuing Tax Invoices, while the mechanism of collection and remittance rested entirely with the VAT Collector as mandated by PMK-73/PMK.03/2010.

Judicial Considerations: Legal Certainty Under Article 16A and SE-17/PJ/2013 Clarifications

The Board of Judges, in their resolution, provided legal certainty by stating that the absence of the 3rd sheet of the SSP cannot serve as a legal basis to alter the delivery status. Based on Article 16A of the VAT Law, the obligation to collect and remit VAT on transactions with VAT Collectors rests solely with the collectors themselves. The Court emphasized that SE-17/PJ/2013 clarifies that the aforementioned SSP is not a mandatory attachment for the vendor's tax reporting. This decision carries crucial implications for tax practice, reaffirming that the risk of administrative failure or non-compliance by a VAT Collector should not be burdened upon the vendor Taxpayer, provided the obligation to issue Tax Invoices has been met. In conclusion, the state's right to claim VAT from the Collector remains, but it cannot be unilaterally shifted into a positive correction of the vendor's self-collected turnover.