After the State provided the Appellant with the list of eligible persons (on the basis of lotteries held by the State), sales contracts were signed between the Appellant and those entitled in accordance with the wording determined and approved by the State (see, for example, Appendix 15 to the Respondent's affidavit). Most of the apartments in the "Buyer's Price" projects in Tirat HaCarmel and Kiryat Eliezer were delivered to the eligible beneficiaries during the first half of 2021, i.e., about 4 years after the signing of the lease contract.
- On October 11, 2018, a lease contract was signed between the ILA and the appellant in relation to the lands of the Kiryat Ono tender, and an appendix to the lease contract was signed: Special Conditions (Buyer's Price Track) (Appendix 8 to the appellant's affidavit).
On November 4, 2018, a "Buyer's Price Tenders" building contract was signed between the State and the Appellant in relation to the Kiryat Ata complexes (Appendix 7 of the Appellant's affidavit).
- After the appellant won the "Buyer's Price" tenders in Tirat HaCarmel and Kiryat Eliezer, the control company (Y.T.B. Ltd.) to the appellant a letter of instructions for the submission of documents for the purpose of obtaining approval and publication of a sale within the framework of the "Buyer's Price" project (Appendix A to the appellant's affidavit), and subsequently correspondence was exchanged between the appellant and the control company in connection with the Kiryat Eliezer project regarding documents that the appellant was required to provide to the control company in order to start the project (Appendix B, Appendix C and Appendix E to the appellant's affidavit).
- On July 5, 2018, the appellant filed with respondent 1 a motion to amend an assessment according to Section 85(a)(1) of the Real Estate Taxation Law in relation to a tender in Kiryat Eliezer, in which it requested a refund of 1/6 of the purchase tax, in accordance with Regulation 2(1a) The Real Estate Taxation Regulations (Appreciation and Purchase) (Purchase Tax), 5735 – 1975 (hereinafter – Purchase Tax Regulations) due to the issuance of the building permit, within 24 months from the date of winning the tender (Appendix 13 to the respondent's affidavit).
On June 10, 2019, respondent No. 1's decision was given in the aforementioned request to amend the assessment, according to which the respondent decided to accept the request to amend the assessment (Appendix 14 to the respondent's affidavit).
- On December 2, 2019, the appellant filed the motion to amend the assessments that are the subject of the appeals in this case (Appendix 4 to the Respondent's affidavit), on the grounds that in 2019 it was brought to its attention by external tax experts that there had been a legal error in the self-assessments submitted by it and approved by the Respondent, that it did not acquire a "right in real estate" as part of winning the "Buyer's Price" tenders discussed in the appeals in this case, and therefore it is not obligated to pay purchase tax at all. Accordingly, the appellant asked the respondent to refund the purchase tax paid by her.
- On July 6, 2021, the Respondent's decision was given in relation to the request to amend the assessment (Appendix 5 to the respondent's affidavit), according to which the application was rejected and it was determined that the appellant had no reason to amend the assessment under the 85 (a) and in any case the appellant acquired a "right in the land" as part of its winning of the "Buyer's Price" tenders.
- Due to the Respondent's decision to reject the application to amend the assessment, the appeals were filed (as well as many other appeals, as stated above).
As part of the management of the appeals before the Appeals Committee, an affidavit of the main witness was submitted on behalf of the Appellant by Mr. Arnon Friedman, the Appellant's Director General (marked p/2), as well as an expert opinion of Shmuel Marco, CPA (marked P/1).