Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwarden, 29-11-2022, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2022:10306, 20/00677 t/m 20/00679

2.6.1.

De correcties zien op intracommunautaire leveringen van auto’s die belanghebbende heeft gelist naar:

2.6.2

Uit de listing volgt dat belanghebbende in 2014 en 2015 – per genoemde entiteit – de volgende omzet heeft vermeld op haar Opgaaf intracommunautaire transacties:

2.8.2.

[naam9] SRL: ‘a tax audit was performed at [naam9] SRL, VAT NO RO378287. The company was included on the list of IC buyers sent to our fiscal administration. The company made IC acquisitions of used vehicles and resold them in Romania, especially to private individuals. According to VIES, your taxpayer [belanghebbende] BV, VAT number NL [nummer1] declared intra community supplies of used cars to the Romanian company [naam9] SRL (RO 378287) in amount of 1.076.950 Euro between December 2013 and August 2014. According to the tax audit performed, [naam9] SRL recorded no acquisitions from your taxpayer.’

2.8.3.

2.8.4.

2.8.5.

2.8.6.

2.8.7.

[naam14] : ‘Taxpayer [naam14] j.d.o.o. did not submit any kind of tax declaration. [naam14] j.d.o.o. is new company. director of the company made a statement (in attachment) that the company did not start with business activities yet and that they did not open bank account yet. (…) Company [naam14] j.d.o.o. is registered at the address [adres2] and the owner of the company is Ms. [naam20] with place of residence at the address [adres3] . mr. [naam21] stated that she is his wife. [naam14] do not have business premisses or equipment for performing business activities. They do not have employees, they do not submit tax declarations and they deny any IC acquisitions. Because of suspicion of involvement in business transactions connected with fraudulent activities in EU we have cancelled their VAT numbers.’

2.8.8.

2.8.9.

[naam16] 2016 KFT: ‘The HU taxpayer did not fulfil its tax return obligation for the period of May-June 2016 and it submitted recapitulative statement neither. The taxpayer neither has permanent establishment nor employees. Its registered seat address is a seat service provider company. Our auditors sent summons to the taxpayer (quoted date: 31.08.2016). After our examination we will send our final reply.(…)The taxpayer did not declare its activity under the period in question. The taxpayer did not submit its VAT returns and it did not submit its recapitulative statements. Our auditors carried out spot check at the registered seat address ( [adres4] ). The name of [naam16] 2016 Kft was exposed at this address. Our auditors found a seat service provider company there. Nobody stayed at the address. Our auditors called [naam22] Kft, this company sent via e-mail the HU taxpayer’s seat contract which was valid till 11 October 2016. Regarding to the abovementioned facts, our examination was unsuccessful. Our auditors initiated the suspension of the tax number of the taxpayer.’

2.10.1.

Transportbedrijf [naam23] (uit Litouwen) heeft 3 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende in 2014 werden gefactureerd aan [naam9] SRL. Voorts heeft dit bedrijf 4 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende in 2015 werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

2.10.2.

Transportbedrijf [naam24] UAB (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2014 tot en met 2016, 11 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 35 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT, 63 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam10] , 8 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam16] 2016 KFT, 15 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam12] KFT en 4 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam14] . Het dossier bevat hierover - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

- The date and time had been indicated by the purchasers of the cars by phone.

- The manager states that the drivers used to introduce themselves at the ' [belanghebbende] " firm as representatives of the carrier, and used to present only their ID documents. No documents of the order, of the payments for the cars, etc., needed to be presented.

- CMRs were filled in by the consignor, the drivers of UAB " [naam24] " used to sign in field 23 of a CMR and, as per the manager's requirement, they had to indicate the address where the cars had to actually be unloaded in field 17 of the CMR.

- The company does not have any data concerning the statements or other documents.

- The dates of loading and unloading indicated in the CMRs are correct, they match the data of the tracking system.

- The accounts were settled for the provided car transportation service in cash by the purchasers of the cars — the German natural persons. (…)

- According to the manager, the cars were delivered at the addresses indicated by phone by the customer (the purchaser of cars). UAB " [naam24] " has provided travel routes of car transporters recorded by a transport control system of UAB " [naam26] ".

- The drivers were instructed to go to Berlin by the purchasers of the cars (the orderers of transportation).

- Since [naam1] used to indicate a wrong delivery address, the manager of " [naam24] " UAB had warned the drivers that, in case of a discrepancy between the address of unloading as indicated in the CMR and the actual unloading address, the address where cars were actually unloaded should be indicated in field 17 of the CMR. At present. the manager has explained to the drivers that a change of the unloading address is possible only in writing.

4) Questions: -Could you ask for the contact details of the purchasers?

- Could you ask which natural person is connected to the following companies?

Answer: According to the manager, " [naam24] " UAB does not have any data concerning natural persons and the listed companies (who is related to which). " [naam24] " UAB is only able to provide addresses where were unloaded the cars loaded by [naam1] :

- [adres6] , the main customer Fady tel. [nummer4] ; [nummer5] .

- [adres7] , under the name of [naam27] , phone No. unknown.

- [adres8] . [naam84] or [naam27] .

- [adres9] . [naam85] or [naam27] . [naam28] and [naam29] .

(…)" [naam24] " UAB is convinced that [naam1] knew the addresses (in Berlin) to which the cars were carried, that the freights were delivered, because they have never received any claims concerning non-delivered freights from either the consignor of freights or the recipients indicated in the CMRs.’

2.10.3.

Transportbedrijf [naam30] (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2014 tot en met 2016, 3 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam8] SRL, 2 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam10] s.r.o., 9 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam12] KFT en 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werd en gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

2.10.4.

Transportbedrijf [naam35] UAB (uit Litouwen) heeft in 2016, 10 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam14] en 7 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

- The order to the drivers to drive to Berlin was issued by a representative of UAB " [naam23] " (…)

- CMRs were filled in by the sender - a representative of " [belanghebbende] BV'. Following the head of the company, CMR sender's information was not corrected, because the first page of CMR is left for the sender, therefore the information about the cargo must be identical to that on other CMR pages.

Following the driver [naam39] , on CMR No. BP [nummer2] . dated 2016/04/07, the address of unloading Berlin D was filled in by him at first, because he was aware, that he will have to deliver the cargo to Berlin, but the sender of cargo changed the address of unloading, while filling in CMR data.(…).’

2.10.5.

Transportbedrijf UAB [naam40] (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2014 tot en met 2016, 2 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam8] SRL, 3 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam12] KFT, 13 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT, 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam10] s.r.o. en 6 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam16] 2016 KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

2.10.6.

Transportbedrijf [naam41] Transportas (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2015 tot en met 2016, 1 transport verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 2 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam16] 2016 KFT, 7 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam15] KFT en 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

2.10.7.

Transportbedrijf UAB [naam47] (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2015 tot en met 2016, 19 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 31 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT, 65 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam15] KFT en 10 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam16] 2016 KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

- The CMRs ware filled in by the employees of “ [belanghebbende] BV', the employees of UAB ‘ [naam47] ' would just sign them and put a seal (field 23 of CMR).

- UAB " [naam47] " has not confirmed that the employees of the company had signed the transportation documents. UAB " [naam47] " has not provided these documents.

- The dates of taking of the cars indicated in the transportation documents enclosed to the SCAC form are the same as the dates of loading of the cars indicated in the CMRs provided by UAB „ [naam47] ".

- The transportation services were paid by the recipients/purchasers of the cars which are indicated in CMRs in cash, at the time of delivery of the cars (documents enclosed).

- The cars were delivered to other addresses than it is indicated in the CMRs. According to the explanation of UAB " [naam47] " and the issued VAT invoices provided, the cars were transported from the Netherlands to Germany.

UAB " [naam47] " transport coordinator [naam48] has explained that the information about the delivery addresses had been indicated/coordinated by phone by the recipients/purchasers of the cars. The transport coordinator of UAB „ [naam47] " had indicated (by SMS messages) to the drivers the exact addresses of the delivery of the cars.

- UAB ,, [naam47] " has explained that CMR had been filled in by the consignor, the employees of ‘ [belanghebbende] BV", and not the carrier UAB “ [naam47] ".’ (…)

2.10.8.

Transportbedrijf UAB [naam53] (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2015 tot en met 2016, 7 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT, 2 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam16] 2016 KFT en 9 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam15] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

7. Upon arrival to load the cars, the drivers presented empty CMR, which were filled in by [belanghebbende] B.V. employees;

8. All fields of the CMR were filled in by [belanghebbende] B.V employees, except 23rd field which was filled in by the drivers;

(…)10. On the CMR 2nd field the specified address is correct, in the 3rd field the specified address of unloading of cars is incorrect, which was corrected by the driver to the exact address Berlin DC. The change of address was received during the route, which was different from the indicated on the CMR. The driver did not inform the employees of [belanghebbende] B.V. about the change of address; during a telephone conversation the drivers received information on the change of the place of unloading of cars. The drivers did not inform the managers of the carrier company about the change of address;

11. The cars were delivered to the address Berlin DC;

12. The drivers signed in the 23rd field on the CMR; (…).’

2.10.9.

Transportbedrijf UAB [naam54] (uit Litouwen) heeft in de periode 2015 tot en met 2016, 2 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam8] SRL, 7 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam14] , 12 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, 19 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam10] s.r.o. en 21 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

2. The official explained that the vehicle transportation orders were received by phone or SMS messages.

3. The orders indicated loading addresses of the vehicles, date, time and places where drivers had to meet with the clients.

4. The Company didn’t receive information about what vehicles (car models, registration numbers, VIN codes) they will have to transport. The official explained that clients indicated the place, date, and time when/where the drivers should arrive.

5. The following persons placed the orders: [Y] . Phone No.+ [nummer11] , [L] . Phone No.+ [nummer12] , [naam73] . Phone No. + [nummer13] .

6. Clients informed about the place and date of loading of the vehicles by phone.

7. The drivers explained that they met the clients at the indicated address and were escorted to the car parking lot, where they were instructed which vehicles should be loaded.

Drivers didn’t present any documents to [naam1] concerning the vehicles that had been loaded.

8. Clients filled out the CMR documents, except for 23rd and 25th fields.

9. The official explained that UAB " [naam54] " could not fill out CMR documents, because the drivers would leave Lithuania for a long time, he also explained that the clients filled out the CMR documents because that had all the information about the transported vehicles and places of unloading.

10. Addresses indicated in the 2nd and 3rd field of the CMR was incorrect. Only clients communicated with the representatives of Su [belanghebbende] B.V., the driver didn’t provide any information about incorrect addresses. The official and manager of the transportation company knew that the delivery addresses were different that the addresses indicated in the CMR.

11. In all instances the vehicles were delivered to the address: [adres5] .

12. The drivers of the transportation company signed the 23rd field of the CMR.

13. The drivers explained that in all instances they delivered the vehicles to the same address, because of this they ignored the address indicated in the 23rd field. (…)’

2.10.10.

Transportbedrijf UAB [naam58] heeft in de periode 2015 tot en met 2016, 20 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam10] s.r.o., 4 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam14] , 3 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT en 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam16] 2016 KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - volgende informatie:

3. In the order the following address of loading is specified: [vestigingsplaats] , [adres11] , [belanghebbende] ; the address of unloading: [adres5] , Germany; also the date and the price (attached).

4. UAB " [naam58] " was not informed which cars it will have to transport, this information was given only upon arrival to the place of loading: [adres11] [belanghebbende] , [vestigingsplaats] , the Netherlands (the orders are attached).

5. The company was going following the order to the specified address to the place of loading. The numbers of contact telephones: + [nummer14] , + [nummer15] , + [nummer16] , + [nummer17] , + [nummer18] , + [nummer19] . The transportation of freight was intermediated by [naam86] , who, following the director of UAB " [naam58] ", is living in Berlin, address was not specified (the explanation is attached). Additional contact person JSC "Transkede", VAT number [nummer27] , organizing the transportation of freight on the route the Netherlands - Berlin (attached).

6. The date and time of takeover of the cars was arranged through WATTS AP software.

7. Through WATTS AP software it was arranged within 1-2 days, which vehicle will arrive for the transportation of freight.

(…)10. The destinations of the freight were specified by the representatives of Arabic origin of INTERNACIONAL TRANSPORT AND SCHIPING COMPANY [naam16] . In the 2nd and 3rd fields on the CMR the indicated place of unloading is Slovakia or Hungary, but the actual place of unloading - [adres5] , Germany. UAB " [naam58] " cannot explain, why the representatives of INTERNACIONAL TRANSPORT AND SCHIPING COMPANY [naam16] indicated other places of unloading than indicated on the orders in the 2nd and 3rd fields on the CMR.

11. The actual address of delivery of the cars - [adres5] , Germany.

(…)’

2.10.11.

Transportbedrijf UAB [naam59] (uit Litouwen) heeft in 2014, 1 transport verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam8] SRL, 1 transport van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam11] KFT, en in de periode 2015 tot en met 2016, 5 transporten verzorgd van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam13] KFT en 3 transporten van auto’s die door belanghebbende werden gefactureerd aan [naam15] KFT. Het dossier bevat - voor zover hier van belang - de volgende informatie:

- The manager of UAB " [naam59] " [naam61] has indicated that the transportation services had been paid: by [naam76] AUTOMOBILES Import Export SL. (…)

- According to the explanation provided by the manager of the Taxpayer, the cars had not been delivered to the addresses indicated in the CMR, i.e.. [naam77] , Budapest Hongarge.

- The manager of UAB " [naam59] " [naam61] has indicated in the provided explanation that the consignor of the goods had instructed (by phone) to deliver the freight to an unloading place at the address [adres5] , Germany. It must be noted that, it the provided CMRs. the indicated place of unloading is not Germany but Hungary- [naam77] . The manager of the Taxpayer has explained orally that the driver who had transported the freight: [naam60] , is away at present and thus he cannot explain the discrepancy in the freight unloading addresses, however, the manager has ascertained that the freight had been unloaded in Germany although another address is indicated in the CMR.’

2.10.12.

Tot de dossierstukken behoren enkele loggegevens van ritten van bovengenoemde transporteurs, waaruit volgt dat het vervoer van de auto’s fysiek heeft plaatsgevonden vanaf belanghebbende in [vestigingsplaats] naar de door de transportbedrijven aangegeven locaties, waaronder de [adres5] .

2.12.1

De volgende Whatsapp berichten zijn aangetroffen op de telefoon van [naam1] :

2.12.2.

Op de telefoon van werknemer [naam68] zijn de volgende chats aan werknemer [naam69] aangetroffen:

2.12.3.

Op de telefoon van werknemer [naam69] zijn de volgende chats aan [naam1] aangetroffen: