A spokesman for small and medium-sized entrepreneurs at the request of the entrepreneur, the regional brewery entered the proceedings before the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw with a complaint against a decision refusing to reimburse him with an excise duty on flavour beer.
According to the authorities, the fact that the company paid an excise duty higher than due did not constitute an overpayment within the meaning of Article 72(1)(1) The authorities argued that, in the light of the resolution of the full Chamber of Commerce of the Chief Administrative Court judges of 22 June 2011, And GPS 1/11 (further resolution I GPS 1/11) In order to determine the excess excise duty payment, it was necessary to fulfil the additional condition in the form of impoverishment of the taxpayer. According to the authorities, the resolution applied in the case under consideration and the resulting impoverishment of the company was not fulfilled.
Subsequent judgments of the administrative courts on overpayment of excise duties produce a new pro-entrepreneurs' line. Importantly, these rulings take into account, inter alia, the specificity of the business activity of individual entrepreneurs
According to the Ombudsman, the binding power of the I GPS resolution 1/11 should refer only to excess excise duty on electricity. This resolution was adopted in the form of a so-called specific resolution, i.e.
in order to clarify the important legal issue of the reimbursement of excise duty on electricity and should only be applied in this respect. In particular, it should not be extended to other excise goods.
The Ombudsman stressed that the NSA Financial Chamber had consistently refused to apply this resolution to overpayments under the goods and services tax.
The Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw repealed the contested decision as a result of the examination of the company's complaint.
In the oral recitals of the judgment, the Court of First Instance argued, inter alia, that the thesis of the I GPS resolution 1/11 shall not apply in the actual state where the request for an excess payment relates to the excise duty on beer.
He stressed that this resolution should be applied strictly, according to its thesis, and its scope should not be extended to non-electrical products. He stressed that the construction of taxation of electricity excise duty is different from that of beer with the tax in question.
According to the court in fact, the excise duty was not due to the tax and what is not collected is an overpayment to be recovered. WSA merged into joint reconnaissance 10 cases concerning the same entrepreneur in which he issued similar judgments (judgment of the WSA in Warsaw of 16 July 2020, V SA/Wa 2271/19).
- Subsequent judgments of the administrative courts on overpayment of excise duties produce a new pro-entrepreneurs' line. Importantly, these rulings take into account, inter alia, the specificity of the business activity of individual entrepreneurs. This is extremely important because this element is often overlooked by tax authorities in their decisions – comments Jacek Cieplak, Deputy Ombudsman of Small and Medium Entrepreneurs.