Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Keski-Suomen LO 21.9.1984 1282 AI generated

Tax court allows loss deduction for farm where incomplete tax return was submitted only after request.

Case Number Keski-Suomen LO 21.9.1984 1282
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Central Finland allowed the taxpayer's claim to deduct farm losses for the 1981 tax year. Although the taxpayer submitted the tax return form only after being requested and lacked certain details, the lower court confirmed the loss was established. The court ruled that the procedural defect did not invalidate the substantive loss deduction because the return was eventually filed.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TappiontasausL 3 § 1 mom; MaatVL 2 §: A tax return submitted only after request and with deficiencies does not preclude the deduction of verified losses if the tax authority confirms the loss amount.

Keywords

AI generated
farm tax loss deduction incomplete tax return tax authority request procedural defect agricultural income tax

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TappiontasausL 3 § 1 mom
TappiontasausL 3 § 1 mom
MaatVL 2 §
AI generated
kko-precedent_2004_56
Supreme Court quashes fraud conviction where import value understatement was offset by domestic VAT deduction rights.
kho-precedent_2012_103
Tax authority correction allowed for double deduction error treated as administrative mistake under procedural law.
admin_1987_kuopio-county__209
Court dismissed tax increase because late Form 25 submission was cured by prior partial data and official request.
kho-precedent_2016_15
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed gross negligence claim for missing intercompany grant on tax return.
admin_1988_kuopio-county__938
Inheritance tax adjustment deadline missed by beneficiary; court voids adjustment for them but upholds it for others.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

A omisti maatilan, josta ei ollut metsän tuoton lisäksi muuta tuloa kuin lumenaurauksesta 1.400 markkaa ja jonka tulos oli tappiollinen. A oli jättänyt säädettynä aikana metsätalouden osalta veroilmoituslomakkeen 2A, mutta lomakkeen 2 hän oli antanut vasta kehotuksen jälkeen.

Lääninoikeus katsoi, että A oli antanut harjoittamastaan maatilataloudesta säädettynä aikana ja kehotuksetta veroilmoituksen, tosin puutteellisena. Maatilataloudesta oli näin ollen vahvistettava tappio.

Verovuosi 1981.

TappiontasausL 3 § 1 mom

MaatVL 2 §