It should be noted in this context that Mr. Barak was asked in his cross-examination what his connection was to the "Buyer's Price" tenders in the framework of his position, but he avoided providing a substantive answer – see the transcript of the minutes of the hearing of November 2, 2022, page 158, lines 21-23 and page 159, lines 1-6.
- Moreover, a review of Form 7085, which was submitted to the Respondent on December 2, 2019, and which was attached as Appendix A to the amended Statement of Appeal and marked as Exhibit P/7 (a document which, for some reason, was also not attached to Mr. Barak's affidavit), shows that the Appellant explicitly marked with a "V" in the aforesaid form that she wishes to amend the purchase tax assessments of the "Buyer's Price" tenders that are the subject of the application, according to Section 85(3) to the law.
Moreover, an orderly reading of the reasons for the request to amend the assessment clearly shows that the appellant claimed to amend the assessment on the grounds of section 85(a)(3) of the Real Estate Taxation Law, and it is not possible to believe that this is a different cause or that the appellant did not clarify the ground on the basis of which the assessment was requested.
- It should be noted that although during the cross-examination Mr. Barak was given the opportunity to correct himself and accept the fact that P/7 The above testifies to the fact that the appellant requested the corrections of the assessment on the grounds in section 85(a)(3) According to the law, Mr. Barak did not see fit to retract the position expressed in his affidavit, even though it would have been appropriate, as a public servant, to do so – see page 159 of the transcript of the minutes of November 2, 2022, lines 14-20, page 160, lines 9-22, page 161, lines 1-14.
- If that were not enough, Mr. Barak's affidavit was vaguely worded, creating a confusion between real estate rights in the sense of Real Estate Law and "right in real estate" in the sense of Real Estate Taxation Law. In addition, Mr. Barak even saw fit to include in his affidavit statements that constitute probative testimony, in relation to matters and issues that are not in his area of expertise.
Without derogating from Mr. Barak's many years of experience, He is not An accountant by educationTherefore, What was stated in his affidavit on matters related to the appellant's financial statements and the classification of the "Buyer's Price" projects in the appellant's books (see paragraph 33 of his affidavit), without examining Porta regarding the relevant accounting standards rules – there is no Attribute Real weight, certainly in contrast to the expert opinion on behalf of the appellant, of CPA Shmuel Marco.