The controversy surrounding Input VAT crediting often hinges on rigid administrative formalities, as seen in the case of PT WR, where the Tax Authority (DGT) disallowed an Input VAT credit of IDR 493,470,785.00 because the invoice date (July 31, 2015) preceded the official date of the Tax Invoice Serial Number (NSFP) allocation letter (August 7, 2015). The DGT maintained that such invoices are formally defective as they utilize unauthorized serial numbers, thereby nullifying the buyer’s right to claim the credit.
However, PT WR as the Applicant countered this by emphasizing economic substance and the "good faith" principle of the buyer. They argued that the delivery of goods was genuine, payment was executed through valid bank transfers, and the VAT had been duly remitted to the state by the seller. Administratively, a buyer has no legal means to verify the internal issuance date of a counterparty's NSFP allocation letter, as it is a private document between the seller and the tax office.
The Tax Court Judges ultimately adopted a progressive stance, prioritizing the principle of substantial justice. The Panel ruled that the discrepancy in the NSFP date was a purely administrative error on the seller's part and should not revoke the taxpayer's constitutional right to credit Input VAT, provided the transaction is material and real. Furthermore, the Panel emphasized that internal instructions, such as Circular Letters (SE), cannot override taxpayer rights established by higher-level statutes.
The implication of this ruling is significant for businesses, suggesting that as long as "Good Faith" and evidence of transaction materiality (money and goods flow) are robust, formal administrative errors by a counterparty should not penalize the buyer. This conclusion serves as a vital precedent in balancing tax administrative discipline with the fundamental rights of taxpayers.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id