Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 28.1.1987 73/IV AI generated

Court dismissed tax loss carryforward claim for unverified interest expenses exceeding approved deduction.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 28.1.1987 73/IV
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The County Administrative Court dismissed the taxpayer's appeal regarding unverified interest expenses that exceeded the amount approved by the Tax Board. While the Tax Board partially accepted the deduction and allowed a tax loss carryforward, it transferred the remaining disputed interest costs to the County Court for review. The court rejected the taxpayer's claim because the County Court had not examined the specific valuation of these unverified interest expenses prior to the loss carryforward decision.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TappiontasausL 3 §; TappiontasausL 8 §: A tax loss carryforward cannot be established for interest expenses that were not fully verified or approved by the competent tax authority.

Keywords

AI generated
tax loss carryforward interest expense deduction administrative review unverified expenses tax appeal procedure

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TappiontasausL 3 §
TappiontasausL 8 §
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_1987_uusimaa-county__712
Tax court allows loss carryforward claim despite statute limiting appeals to cases with tax liability.
admin_1987_hame-county__85
Court allows deduction of accrued but unpaid interest from assets for wealth tax purposes.
admin_1990_uusimaa-county__305
County Administrative Court allows deduction of operating reserve for loss calculation under Finnish tax law.

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

Valittaja oli vaatinut tuloistaan vähennettäväksi korkokuluja

5 949 markkaa ja vahvistettavaksi tämän johdosta tappion.

Verolautakunta oli valituksen johdosta antamallaan veronoikaisupäätöksellä

hyväksynyt vaatimuksen korkokulujen vähentämisestä

osittain ja vahvistanut valittajalle valtion- ja kunnallisverotuksessa

tappion. Vähentämättä jääneiden korkokulujen

osalta verolautakunta oli siirtänyt asian lääninoikeuden

käsiteltäväksi. Lääninoikeus ei tutkinut valitusta.

Verovuosi 1982.

TappiontasausL 3 §

TappiontasausL 8 §