The Directorate General of Taxation (DGT) frequently disallows Input Tax credits when confirmation from the counterparty's tax office returns a "No Record" status, triggering joint liability mechanisms. This dispute between PT KMSI and the Respondent arose from a VAT Input Tax correction for the April 2016 period totaling IDR 55,674,213.00. The Respondent based its correction on the absence of Tax Invoice data in the tax administration system and alleged that the Taxpayer failed to provide sufficient cash flow and goods flow documentation during the objection stage.
Conversely, PT KMSI firmly refuted these arguments by presenting concrete evidence of VAT payments made to its counterparties, PT TPKK and PT KI. The Petitioner argued that under Article 16F of the VAT Law, a buyer cannot be held jointly liable if they can prove the tax was paid to the seller. The transactions were authentic, supported by invoices, Tax Invoices, and bank transfer records, asserting that the VAT had indeed been collected by the sellers based on the principle of substance over form.
The Board of Judges emphasized in their consideration that this dispute is a matter of evidentiary proof regarding the existence of transactions and tax payments. The Judges ruled that a "No Record" confirmation does not automatically invalidate the right to credit Input Tax as long as the Taxpayer can prove the transaction actually occurred. Through an examination of original evidence in court, including bank statements and payment details, the Board was convinced that the cash flow from PT KMSI to its counterparties was validly executed.
The implication of this ruling reaffirms that the joint liability mechanism should not be the primary tool for tax corrections against buyers. The DGT should first maximize collection efforts against the selling PKP before shifting the tax burden to a good-faith buyer. This decision provides legal protection for Taxpayers, ensuring they are not penalized by the administrative failures or non-compliance of counterparties, provided they maintain robust payment documentation.
In conclusion, PT KMSI's victory underscores the critical importance of the "Cash Flow Test" and orderly documentation in facing formal DGT corrections. The Board of Judges ultimately granted the Petitioner's appeal in its entirety, overturning the Respondent's correction because the transactions were materially proven and the VAT had been fully paid by the buyer to the tax collector.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id