Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 30.8.1990 706/VI AI generated

Court allows company deduction for building acquisition costs under business income tax law.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 30.8.1990 706/VI
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court allowed the company's tax return regarding business income for the 1986 fiscal year. The company argued that a supplementary deduction under the Business Income Tax Act was a valid deduction under the Income and Wealth Tax Act for the building used in its operations. The court agreed, ruling that the deduction met the statutory requirements for business-related expenses.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

ElinkvL 40 §; TVL 26 § 2 mom: A supplementary deduction under the Business Income Tax Act constitutes a valid deduction under the Income and Wealth Tax Act for acquisition costs of a building used in business operations.

Keywords

AI generated
business income tax supplementary deduction building acquisition costs company tax return deductibility of expenses

Cited Legislation

AI generated
ElinkvL 40 §
TVL 26 § 2 mom
AI generated
admin_1991_uusimaa-county__502
Administrative court dismissed appeal allowing different depreciation amounts in state and municipal tax.
admin_1986_aland-county__126
Order dismissed: Company cannot make varying order deductions for ship acquisition price in Aland tax years.
admin_1986_central-finland-county__1194
Administrative court allows company deduction for used trucks by interpreting 'new' as 'new to company' rather than brand new.
admin_1991_kuopio-county__276
Company denied deduction for greenhouse costs after tax authority increased prior year deduction.
kho-precedent_2015_11
Court rejects adjustment of equity for accounting differences between separate and consolidated financial statements under 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

Vuokraustoimintaa harjoittaneen yhtiön verotus oli toimitettu

tulo- ja varallisuusverolain mukaisesti. Elinkeinotulon

verottamisesta annetun lain 40 §:n mukaisen lisäpoiston

katsottiin olevan tulo- ja varallisuusverolain

(1043/74) 26 §:n 2 momentin tarkoittama poisto, joka voitiin

tehdä yhtiön ansiotoiminnassa käytetyn rakennuksen

hankintamenosta. Verovuosi 1986. Äänestys.

TVL 26 § 2 mom

ElinkvL 40 §

KHO:n päätös: A:17.6.1991 T:2103 : Ei muutosta, päätös

tallennettu oikeustapausrekisteriin (FKHO)