Overview of the tax law decisions of the Zurich Tax Appeals Court published between May and July 2021.
- StRG ZH, 1 June 2021, DB.2020.164 / ST.2020.192: Fictitious service in the case of individual extension of the collection deadline (this decision is not yet legally binding): Fictitious service of the objection decisions despite individual extension of the collection deadline for the item. Because the obligor could easily determine the sender in the course of the deadline extension request and because the General Terms and Conditions of Swiss Post explicitly mention that the postal service of the deadline extension has no influence on the legal provisions regarding fictitious service, the obligor cannot derive anything in its favour from the discrepancy between the legal deadline and the deadline for postal service. Dismissal of complaint and appeal.
- StRG ZH, 22 April 2021, GR.2020.5: Start of the revision period in the case of intercantonal double taxation of a property dealer (this decision is final): If a property dealer (legal entity) domiciled outside the canton wishes to apply for a correction of a final property gains tax assessment of the Zurich municipality of domicile in order to eliminate an intercantonal double taxation, it must submit an application for revision. If it wishes to claim additional expenses within the meaning of § 221 para. 2 StG-ZH (e.g. the real estate gains tax attributable to the sale of the property and the pro rata direct federal tax), the 90-day revision period begins at the latest with the submission of the income tax return for the period of the sale of the property. In the case of the assertion of operating losses outside the canton or of an exit loss, the time limit begins with the assessment and tax ruling of the canton of domicile. In the present case, the revision request with regard to additional expenses within the meaning of § 221 para. 2 StG-ZH proves to be late. With regard to the non-cantonal operating loss or segregation loss, the deadline for the appeal was met, but its existence and extent must be substantiated and proven. The derivation of the taxable company does not meet these requirements. This leads to the dismissal of the appeal.
The decisions of the Zurich Tax Appeals Court are available here .
