Analisis Sengketa Pajak Pertambahan Nilai Atas Non Funded Income Pada Pengusaha Jasa Perbankan

Agus Suharsono

Abstract


This study analyzes Value Added Tax disputes on Non-Funded Income at Banking Service Entrepreneurs with a case study of the Supreme Court Reconsideration Decision Number 628/B/PK/PJK/2019 to find out how the Judge decided the dispute. The research method used is juridical normative with statutory, case, and analytical approaches. The data used are laws, Judges' Decisions, and Doctrine. The data were collected by means of document studies, the results of data processing were narrated descriptively with the IREAC law application model: Issues, Rules, Evidence, Application, Conclusion. The results of the research are the tax authorities' opinion that the Selling Agent Fee-Invest Services-Services Priority account as the name implies is income from sales agent service fees as Non-Funded Income which is an object of VAT, Judges based on the evidence in court argued that the account was for banking services that were not objects VAT. In determining taxes, tax authorities are based on formal principles, while judges are based on material principles or the principle of substance over the form. Judges' decisions that are legally enforceable are still a material source of law, and should be used as a consideration for the tax authorities in determining taxes for similar cases so that they do not become tax disputes that must be resolved through acting legal measures that require time, effort and other resources.


Keywords


Tax Dispute; IREAC; substance over the form

References


Agus, S., & Harahap, B. (2018). The Development of Tax Law Application Formula in Indonesia from IRAC into IREAC. ICoL GaS 2018, 06006, 1–11.

Ali, Z. (2011). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Sinar Grafika.

Anderson, W., & Tjondro, E. (2014). Analisis Sengketa Pengkreditan PM Kelapa Sawit atas Kasus Banding Perusahaan X. Tax & Accounting Review, 4(2), 1–6.

Apeldoorn, L. J. van. (2011). Inleiding tot de Studie van Het Nederlandse (Pengantar Ilmu Hukum) (Cetakan ke). Pradya Paramita.

Bank, W. (2009). A Handbook for Tax Simplification. The World Bank Group. https://doi.org/10.1596/28206

Djatmiko, H. (2013). Problematika Pelaksanaan Pengadilan Khusus di Inonesia. In Putih Hitam Pengadilan Khusus (p. 387). Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia.

Handika, I. (2012). Disfungsi Peradilan Pajak Indonesia dalam Merealisasikan Keadilan. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan, 1(3), 359. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.1.3.2012.359-378

Hartono, C. F. G. S. (2006). Penelitian Hukum Di Indonesia Pada Akhir Abad Ke-20. Alumni.

Heru Suyanto, S. (2015). Sengketa Perpajakan Dalam Perspektif Kekuasaan. Yuridis, 2(1), 95–110.

Ibrahim, J. (2012). Teori & Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Banyu Media.

Ikhwansyah, H. S. E. L. F. I. (2017). Permohonan Upaya Hukum Peninjauan Kembali Kedua Kali Berbasis Keadilan Dan Kepastian Hukum. Mimbar Hukum, 29(2), 189–204.

Ispriyarso, B. (2018). Upaya Hukum Dalam Sengketa Pajak. Administrative & Governance Journal, 1(2), 9–14.

Ispriyarso, B. (2019). Kelemahan Lembaga Keberatan Pajak. Administrative Law and Governance Journal, 2(2), 248–258. https://doi.org/10.14710/alj.v2i2.248-258

John Christensen, R. M. (n.d.). Tax Us If You Can (2nd Editio). Tax Justice Network.

Marzuki, P. M. (2010). Penelitian Hukum. Kencana.

Mudjad, M. Hadin; Nuswardani, N. (2012). Penelitian Hukum Indonesia Kontemporer. Genta Publishing.

Purwanto, T. A., Wulan, R., Pendidikan, P., Universitas, V., Yang, P., Kegiatan, M., Tertentu, U., Tertentu, K., Pajak, S., & Nilai, P. P. (2019). Sengketa Pemungutan Pajak Pertambahan Nilai Sebagai Dampak Perbedaan Persepsi Dalam Interpretasi Kriteria Pengusaha Kena Pajak Tertentu. Jurnal Vokasi Indonesia, 7(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.7454/jvi.v7i1.137

Rochaeti, E. (2012). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Wajib Pajak Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Pajak. Jurnal Wawasan Yuridika, 26(1), 497–510. https://doi.org/10.25072/jwy.v26i1.31

Sa’adah, N. (2018). Tinjauan Terhadap Penyelesaian Sengketa Pajak Melalui Lembaga Keberatan. Administrative Law and Governance Journal, 1(3), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.14710/alj.v1i3.268-279

Siregar, H. O., & Suharsono, A. (2021). Tax Dispute Analysis on Market Intelligence Service’S From Outside of Customs. Jurnal SIKAP (Sistem Informasi, Keuangan, Auditing Dan Perpajakan), 5(1), 90. https://doi.org/10.32897/jsikap.v5i1.372

Sitorus, B. (2013). Independensi hakim dalam sistem peradilan pajak di indonesia. Yuridika, 28(1), 29–43.

Soekanto, S. (2015). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. UI-Press.

Soemadi, D. (1986). Sumber-Sumber Hukum Positip (Cetakan ke). Alumni.

Sugiyono. (2005). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. Alfabeta.

Sukardji, U. (2012). Pokok-Pokok Pajak Pertambahan Nilai Indonesia (E. Revisi (ed.)). Rajawali Pres.

Wahyunadi, Y. M. (2015). Peninjauan kembali dalam sengketa pajak. PTUN Jakarta. https://ptun-jakarta.go.id/wp-content/uploads/file/berita/ daftar_arti kel/Peninjauan Kembali Dalam Sengketa Pajak.pdf

Y. Sri Pudyatmoko. (2009). Pengadilan dan Penyelesaian Sengketa Di Bidang Pajak (Edisi Revi). Gramedia Pustaka Utama.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24167/jemap.v4i2.3233

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN 2622-612X | View My Stats