A company which consists of an non-independent accounting branches, its headquarters and branches are in two districts. The Company is an ordinary tax-payer. The branch has a separate bank account. When auditing, if they handle the accounts independently, secondary operations as non-independent accounting methods, the materials are entrusted to headquarter for unified procurement. In the procurement of materials, there will be an inconsistencies between the payment account number and invoice names, can such invoice proceeds deduction?
"State Administration of Taxation on VAT Collection and Management of Certain Issues Notice" ( Guo Shui Fa [ 1995 ] No. 192 ), it provides that a tax-payer when purchasing goods or taxable services, pays transportation fees, the payment of such units must be issued against deduction certificate for sales unit, providing consistent service units to be able to declare deductible for input tax, or non-deductible.
According to the above requirements, procurement of materials and invoices which makes the payment account name different will not allow the deduction. However, the State Administration of Taxation and other tax department has issued a specific business document, except as "State Administration of Taxation” on Nokia's unified settlement, “VAT input tax deduction issue for approval" ( Guo Shui Han [ 2006 ] No. 1211 ), it provides that Nokia purchases goods from all branches of suppliers for VAT invoices, payment by the corporation unity resulting in the purchase of goods units and the actual payment of the purchase invoice has inconsistent name, it is not a "National Administration of Taxation on VAT Collection and Management of Certain Issues Notice " ( Guo Shui Fa [ 1995 ] No. 192 ) Article I (3) of the relevant provisions under this situation allows it to be deducted for inputting VAT.