The Supreme Administrative Court upheld decision of Municipal Court that taxpayer failed to prove oil was used to produce heat.
The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed a taxpayer’s appeal from a decision of the Municipal Court denying its claim for a refund of excise duty on purchased mineral oils because the company failed to prove that the oils were actually used to produce heat.
The Municipal Court found that to recover the excise duty, the taxpayer must prove that the oil had actually been used to produce heat, which requires the taxpayer to demonstrate full control over the production of heat and the consumption of the oils. Specifically, the company must keep more detailed records of the oil supplied and its specific consumption and must allocate sufficient staff to continuously monitor the entire heat production process, down to the points of consumption.
Read a December 2024 report prepared by the KPMG member firm in the Czech Republic