Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 9.10.1987 712/VI AI generated

Tax court allows loss carryforward claim despite statute limiting appeals to cases with tax liability.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 9.10.1987 712/VI
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The tax board refused to examine a request for loss carryforward because the taxpayer had no tax liability, citing a statute restricting appeals to such cases. The court of appeal held that the tax board must examine the claim regardless of the statutory limitation on appeals. Consequently, the court ordered the tax board to reconsider the request, establishing that procedural restrictions on appeals do not preclude substantive examination of loss carryforward claims.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TappiontasausL 3 § 2 mom; TappiontasausL 8 § 1 mom: A tax authority must examine a request for loss carryforward even if the taxpayer has no tax liability, as statutory restrictions on appeals do not bar substantive review.

Keywords

AI generated
loss carryforward tax liability appeal restriction tax board duty substantive review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TappiontasausL 3 § 2 mom
TappiontasausL 3 § 2 mom
TappiontasausL 8 § 1 mom
TappiontasausL 8 § 1 mom
VerotusL 82 §
AI generated
admin_1989_uusimaa-county__1323
Tax loss carryforward adjustment barred after finalization of prior year tax assessment.
admin_1991_uusimaa-county__233
Administrative court dismissed appeal; 1986 tax loss validly offset against 1987 income despite later audit correction.
admin_1990_uusimaa-county__305
County Administrative Court allows deduction of operating reserve for loss calculation under Finnish tax law.
admin_1987_northern-karelia-county__644
Tax loss carryforward claim dismissed as late appeal filed after statutory deadline expired.
admin_1987_uusimaa-county__73
Court dismissed tax loss carryforward claim for unverified interest expenses exceeding approved deduction.

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

Verovelvollinen, jolle oli säännönmukaisessa verotuksessa

vahvistettu tappio, teki tappion uudelleen vahvistamista koskevan

veronoikaisuvaatimuksen. Verolautakunta ei ottanut

veronoikaisuvaatimusta tutkittavaksi, koska vahvistetusta

tappiosta tappiontasauksesta tuloverotuksessa annetun lain

8 §:n 1 momentin mukaan saatiin valittaa vain sillä perusteella,

että verovelvolliselle olisi ollut määrättävä tuloveroa.

Lääninoikeus katsoi, että verolautakunnan tuli mainitun

säännöksen estämättä ottaa veronoikaisuvaatimus tutkittavaksi.

Äänestys 2-1 Verovuosi 1979. Verovuosi 1981.

VerotusL 82 §

TappiontasausL 3 § 2 mom

TappiontasausL 8 § 1 mom

Ikkala-Andersson-Nuorvala: Uusi elinkeinoverolainsäädäntö

1986 s. 423-426 ja s. 439-441

Esko Linnakangas: Tappiontasaus tuloverotuksessa IV,

Verotus 1985 s. 101