The Courtroom of the Superior Court of Justice of the Autonomous Community of Valencia, Spain, in its recent judgment of 14 September 2016 (Case number 520/2016, rapporteur Olarte Madero), annulling a settlement by the Plusvalía’s tax made by the City of Paterna (Valencia).
For the purposes of the liquidation of the Tax on the Increase in Value of Urban Land (or gain local goodwill), the deed of purchase of a farm (awarded in 1987), along with the back of new work on it and its transmission in 2014, prove the depreciation of the property. Consequently, when the selling price lower than cost, not the taxable event of this tax occurs.
The case prosecuted by the Judgment is as follows: Settlement made by the transmission of a land and industrial building later built on it.
Pursuant to the purchase of the land deed, 1987, the purchase price thereof was 69,717.40 euros, while, as set out in the deed of declaration of new construction, the value of construction of the ship the same in 1999 was 264,445.32 euros. In 2014 it passed both the field and the ship jointly by global price of 253,420.66 euros, made by the City Council turned to the owner of the property settlement amount on city surplus 50,000 euros, so that liquidation was challenged before the competent court of Administrative Litigation, dictating judgment dismissing the claim and, therefore, contesting the municipal settlement made by the taxpayer, ie the seller.
Accordingly, the trial judge had considered that it had not provided “any opinion or of evidence attesting that between the date of acquisition and accrual basis, there has been no increase in value of urban land.” Consequently, understood the trial judge that “in the case on trial there was a complete absence of evidence showing that the land value in the transmission was lower than the acquisition“, reason why agrees with the City Council, and It maintains the practiced liquidation.
Then, the claimant challenged the judgment at first instance, drawing on appeal to the High Court of Valencia, who upheld the appeal lodged against that judgment, annulling and superseding the payment made, to the appellant.
In this judgment of Appeal, the Court understood that the substantive issue raised by the lawsuit was “to determine whether or not sufficient evidence to conclude that the price of transmission is lower than the acquisition of good.”
The reasoning of the Supreme Court, concerning the evidence deployed in the proceedings, are constituted by the three Title Dees, contained in the file, that of (land purchase of) July 3, 1987, that of (new construction of] 25 February 1999 and the [transmission of land and ship, of) March 26, 2,014. “and based on them, determined that the same production depreciation of property value invoked by the plaintiff, ” is clear”.
And such deeds “is indirectly shows the lower value of the property at the time of transmission in relation to the value of the acquisition,” concluding because the judgment that: “only the value of the overhang threshold, exceeds the value that was broadcast the property. Therefore, the object of transmitting is a “single (one body),” which include not separate ground and flight, and apply the tax “the good existing property on which it has built a building,” Finally solves the Court “the estimate the administrative appeal brought against the aforementioned settlement of the decision of the Town Hall tax.”
Obviously, this approach is justified by the impact been in real estate by the “Estate economic crisis” started on 2.008 …. and in which we seem to overcome, without being able to say with certainty”, today. Therefore, for safety, proceed that could be claimed, as already anticipated in previous post, the capital gain you. You have paid in property badly sold, ie for a lower price than you bought it or it was recorded in his public writing new work.
In this case, you can contact us, and ask your consultancy for free, where we will be personalized and professional manner and, if interested in filing a claim for refund of the amount paid by you, Plusvalía’s tax, their City council or the City which had owned the corresponding legal service contract, between the parties, would be signed.
Saenz y Asociados, Abogados
The information and legal counsel offered in the Blog section is just guiding and not binding. If you need to make a qualified legal inquiry, you must always address to a professional duly authorized. If you wish, you may contact us at email@example.com