The Director General of Taxation (DGT) performed a positive correction on VAT non-collected deliveries worth IDR 1,318,407,851.00, citing the taxpayer's failure to meet formal customs document requirements. This dispute centers on the interpretation of Article 16B of the VAT Law in conjunction with Government Regulation Number 32 of 2009 regarding tax facilities in bonded zones.
The conflict began when the Tax Auditor stated that the delivery of goods from a local area to a Bonded Zone was not supported by BC 4.0 documents validated (stamped and signed) by Customs officials during the field audit. The DGT argued that without perfect physical evidence of the BC 4.0 document, the VAT non-collection facility could not be granted, thus the delivery must be corrected to VAT-liable. Conversely, PT BWI asserted that all transactions were reported in Tax Invoices with code 07 and supported by customs documents proving the goods actually entered the Bonded Zone.
The Board of Judges, in its legal consideration, emphasized the principle of material truth. After a thorough examination of the evidence presented in the trial, the Board found that PT BWI was able to present valid BC 4.0 documents, invoices, and synchronized Tax Invoices. The Board opined that as long as the flow of goods into the Bonded Zone can be proven according to customs regulations, the right to the VAT non-collection facility remains with the Taxpayer.
This decision provides confirmation that customs and tax administrations must be synchronized. For Taxpayers, this victory demonstrates the importance of orderly administration of BC 4.0 documents as a vital instrument in maintaining tax facilities. Consequently, the DGT cannot automatically make corrections based on a temporary absence of documents if, during the objection or appeal process, the Taxpayer is able to prove the authentic existence of said documents.
In conclusion, strengthening the filing system for customs documents is key to mitigating VAT dispute risks for companies transacting with entrepreneurs in Bonded Zones.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here