Analysis of the Flow of Money Flow of Goods in the Context of Proving Defective Tax Invoices against Tax Auditor Findings in 2019
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33062/ajb.v8i01.28Keywords:
flow of money flow of goods , defective tax invoices, tax auditor findingsAbstract
The purpose of this research is to determine the analysis of the flow of money, the flow of goods in the context of proving defective tax invoices in refuting the findings of the examiner at PT Pionirbeton Industri. The type of research applied is qualitative research with a descriptive approaches. The results showed that there were factors causing defective tax invoices that became the findings of the examiner, one of which was the human factor, namely the vendor did not deposit VAT on the tax invoice issued to PBI and did not report it to the tax office, for these findings can be proven by using the goods flow money flow report which focuses on tracing the process of receiving goods to the payment process. With the flow of money the flow of goods succeeded in proving that the input tax invoice was defective and avoided the potential to pay IDR. 813,169,623 and avoided an additional fine of 100% so that the total loss of PBI was IDR. 1,626,339,246.
References
Angeline, C. &. (2015). Analisis Variasi Keputusan Banding Mengenai Sengketa Faktur Pajak Pertambahan Nilai 2009-2013. Tax And Accounting Review 4, 72.
Direktorat Jenderal Pajak Undang-undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2009 tentang Perubahan Keempat atas Undang-undang Nomor 6 tahun 1983 tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan.
https://kbbi.kata.web.id/. (2022, Desember 21).
https://www.ats-konsultama.com/jawaban/penggunaan-rekening-pribadi-untuk-transaksi-keuangan-perusahaan. (2022, Desember 12).
https://www.idntimes.com/life/education/zihan-berliana-ram-ghani/pengertian-5w-1h. (2022, Desember 21).
https://www.talenta.com/fakturpajak. (2022, Desember 21).
Mardiasmo. (2016). Perpajakan. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Mardiasmo. (2018). Perpajakan. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Martono, &. N. (2015). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif. Jakarta: PT. Rajagrafindo Persada.
Peraturan Direktur Jenderal Pajak Nomor Per-04/PJ/2012 Tentang Panduan Penggunaan dan Teknik Pemeriksaan untuk Menguji Kepatuhan Pemenuhan Kewajiban Perpajakan.
Peraturan Direktur Jenderal Pajak Nomor PER-24/PJ/2012 Tetang Bentuk Ukuran, Tata Cara Pengisian Keterangan, Prosedur Pemberitahuan Dalam Rangka Pembuatan, Tata Cara Pembetulan Atau Penggantian, Dan Tata Cara Pembatalan Faktur Pajak.
Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian Bisnis ( Pendekatan Kunatitatif, Kualitatif, KOmbinasi dan R&D ). Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sukardji, &. U. ((Edisi Revisi 2014)). Perpajakan Pertambahan Nilai. Jakarta: Rajagrafindo Persada.
Suprajadi, L. (2012). Metode Arus Dalam Pemeriksaan Pajak. Bina Ekonomi, 204.
Supramono, D. &. (2015). Perpajakan Indonesia, Mekanisme dan Perhitungan. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Suyanto. (2016). Penggunaan Metode Arus Uang Masuk dalam Pemeriksaan Pajak sebagai Sumber Sengketa Pajak Berdasarkan Pasal 29 Undang-undang Nomor 28 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perubahan Ketiga atas Undang-undang Nomor 6 Tahun 1983 Tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tatacara. Lex Certa, 161-175.
Tersiana. (2018). Metode Penelitian. Yogyakarta: Yogyakarta.
Undang- undang No. 7 Tahun 2021 tentang Harmonisasi Peraturan Perpajakan.
Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2009 jo. Undang-Undang No. 28 Tahun 2007 jo. Undang-Undang No. 16 Tahun 2000 jo. Undang-Undang No. 9 Tahun 1994 jo. UU No. 6 Tahun 1983 tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Undang-Undang Nomor 42 tahun 2009 Jasa dan Pajak Penjualan.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Darwin Marasi Purba
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
