On the basis of the totality of the aforesaid, I agree with the conclusion of the Chairman of the Committee that the appeal should be dismissed.
Shabtai Biran, CPA - Committee Member:
I have carefully read the opinion of the Chairman of the Committee, Justice Bornstein, and I agree with his conclusion that the appellant did not prove that the apartment he purchased was a "shell apartment". Therefore, there is room to impose purchase tax at the rates that apply to a "residential apartment" that is not a single apartment. I will add that in his cross-examination the appellant contradicted himself with regard to the picture he presented (M/1) as opposed to the photographs that were attached to the respondent's affidavits, when he initially claimed that there was no front door in the apartment at the time of its purchase, and later changed his version and claimed that the direction of opening the door was different, but in the end he confirmed that there was a door in the apartment and it was replaced (Transcript, pp. 14,22-27; pp. 21,6-19). I also agree with Justice Bornstein's opinion regarding the amount of the charge for expenses.
It was decided, as stated in the opinion of the Chairman of the Committee, Judge Bornstein, to dismiss the appeal and to charge the appellants the respondent's expenses in the sum of ILS 40,000. The said sum will be paid within 30 days, otherwise it will bear linkage and interest differentials from today until the date of actual payment.
Granted today, September 15,2026, in the absence of the parties.