Post by xyz3600 on Feb 24, 2024 23:55:36 GMT -8
The 1st Panel of the Superior Court of Justice returned to judge this Tuesday (6/8) an appeal that questions the base value for calculating non-cumulative PIS and Cofins credits when purchasing products for resale. The trial was suspended following a request from Minister Benedito Gonçalves. STJ STJ STJ returns to analyzing PIS and Cofins credits in case of resale. In May, the rapporteur, minister Gurgel de Faria, voted in accordance with the understanding of the Federal Revenue Service. For the minister, there would be no right to credit on the portion referring to ICMS-ST. "I defend the ICMS-Tax Replacement discount, which would reduce the amount to which the taxpayer would be entitled to settle tax debts. For the Revenue, if there was R$70 in ICMS-ST, for example, the credit for payment of PIS and Cofins would be R$30", he said.
In this Tuesday's session, ministers Regina Helena Costa and Napoleão Nunes Maia Filho opened a difference when understanding that there is a right to credit on the portion referring to ICMS-ST. Case Analyzed In this case, the panel analyzes an appeal from a supermarket. The taxpayer's thesis is Middle East Mobile Number List that the PIS and Cofins credit to be used by the retailer must be the full value of the purchase invoice for the products that will be resold, including the value of ICMS-Tax Replacement. The company only uses the amount it pays for the products to calculate the PIS and Cofins credit, plus the IPI value, even if PIS and Cofins were not levied on this tax in the previous stage. If you buy, for example, an item for R$100 and sell it for R$200, you understand that the difference of R$100 should be considered credit.
Another relevant change already present in the original text of the MP is the inclusion, in the Civil Code, of a provision according to which, in inter-company relations, symmetry and parity of the contracting parties must be assumed. The aim is to reduce paternalism on the part of the judge when interpreting business contracts, which is positive. However, jurisprudence had already consolidated the understanding that the asymmetry of powers between the parties cannot be invoked to waive the fulfillment of agreed obligations.It must be proven that the businessman contributed to the commission of the crime, had the power to decide on the fact, that he had the power to decide on the continuation of the crime, that he had, for example, the power to tell the other defendants do not continue in the criminal enterprise, that he had the power to decide on the course of the crime, complete control over the fact considered criminal. It is important to bring up and highlight the ruling handed down by the supreme court, with a vote written by the noble minister Celso de Melo.
In this Tuesday's session, ministers Regina Helena Costa and Napoleão Nunes Maia Filho opened a difference when understanding that there is a right to credit on the portion referring to ICMS-ST. Case Analyzed In this case, the panel analyzes an appeal from a supermarket. The taxpayer's thesis is Middle East Mobile Number List that the PIS and Cofins credit to be used by the retailer must be the full value of the purchase invoice for the products that will be resold, including the value of ICMS-Tax Replacement. The company only uses the amount it pays for the products to calculate the PIS and Cofins credit, plus the IPI value, even if PIS and Cofins were not levied on this tax in the previous stage. If you buy, for example, an item for R$100 and sell it for R$200, you understand that the difference of R$100 should be considered credit.
Another relevant change already present in the original text of the MP is the inclusion, in the Civil Code, of a provision according to which, in inter-company relations, symmetry and parity of the contracting parties must be assumed. The aim is to reduce paternalism on the part of the judge when interpreting business contracts, which is positive. However, jurisprudence had already consolidated the understanding that the asymmetry of powers between the parties cannot be invoked to waive the fulfillment of agreed obligations.It must be proven that the businessman contributed to the commission of the crime, had the power to decide on the fact, that he had the power to decide on the continuation of the crime, that he had, for example, the power to tell the other defendants do not continue in the criminal enterprise, that he had the power to decide on the course of the crime, complete control over the fact considered criminal. It is important to bring up and highlight the ruling handed down by the supreme court, with a vote written by the noble minister Celso de Melo.