"We have not received an answer, certainly not one that satisfies the opinion, as to how the respondent intends to bring to the conclusion that this is a single legal entity of the sellers and the contracting companies. We have not received any answer as to where such an argument is found in the decision in the objection. In fact, the respondent's counsel confirmed that indeed there is no such argument in the decision in the objection.
... Now, in the framework of the appeal, the respondent seeks to broaden the front of the dispute between the parties and to insert a factual element that has never been alleged against the appellants, at any stage of the assessment stages, and not even in the framework of the reply submitted on its behalf. In our opinion, raising this argument is not permitted in the framework of the appeal at hand." (p. 13 ibid.)
This procedural decision is conclusive, and therefore we will not be required to consider the possibility that an undertaking "on the part" of the companies is, in part and in part, an undertaking "on the part of" the sellers, due to the aforementioned family relationship.
III. The Aspect of the Sale Value
- The appellants reported a sale value of ILS 5.5 million"for each property, in accordance with"Agreed consideration" stated in clause 4.1 of the sale contract. In an assessment according to the best judgment and in the decision in the objection, the respondent determined a sale value of ILS 6.5 million"for each property, based on the combination of the following agreed consideration"to (5.5 million shekels)"h) With the undertaking of the purchasers to bear the existing debt of each seller to the contracting company (ILS 1 million)."h. for each property, according to clause 5.1.2.1 of the sale contract).
- On January 14,2025, during the conduct of the appeals before the committee in Haifa, the respondent announced that he had exercised his authority under the Section 85(a)(3) Law Vatican The assessment for each appellant so that the sale value for each property will be ILS 7.5 million"This is in accordance with the principle "Combining all the permutations" (for the Respondent's understanding). That is, the previous value (ILS 6.5 million)."h) Increased by 1 million shekels"h. Additional due to the buyers' undertaking included in the clause 5.1.2.2 to the contract of sale, i.e., taking the debt The Future to the contracting company.
- But from whom? In a decision dated February 17,2025, the Haifa Appeals Committee determined that "The respondent's decision to amend the assessments is null and void" And this is because the respondent "He did not approach the committee and did not ask for its permission to amend the assessment, but rather presented the committee, even in the present case, to a fait accompli...".
Haifa Appeals Committee "did not deprive the respondent of the ability to request an increase in the assessment, but it was determined that he should have done so in accordance with the instructions Section 89(b) The Real Estate Taxation Law, by way of a request from the Appeals Committee to increase the assessment of a criminal appeal, has the authority given to it" (p. 11 ibid.).