Colombia vs SK Rental SAS, July 2025, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No. 25000-23-37-000-2022-00553-01 (28776)

Posted on | By Courts of Colombia
Category: Burden of Proof, Legality - Legitimacy - Constitutional, Transfer Pricing Documentation | Tag: , , , , ,
« | »

SK Rental SAS had filed an appeal against the tax authorities’ transfer pricing adjustment of its 2016 income tax return. The taxpayer argued that the tax authorities’ assessment were irregular and disregarded transfer pricing operations relating to the acquisition of depreciable fixed assets. Along with its claim, the company requested that an expert opinion prepared by Deloitte and a technical analysis by Crowe Co SAS on transfer pricing for 2016 be admitted as evidence.

The Administrative Court accepted the documentary evidence and administrative records, but rejected the expert and technical analyses.

SK Rental SAS appealed this decision.

Judgment

The Supreme Administrative revoked the lower court’s order denying the expert and technical evidence and instead decreed their admission.

The Court held that, in tax litigation, the valuation of evidence must adhere to the principles of relevancy, pertinency and usefulness. The Court emphasised that expert reports and technical analyses are an appropriate means of proof in transfer pricing matters since these issues involve specialised knowledge that cannot be substituted by ordinary documents.

The Court recalled that judges must ensure that all lawful and necessary evidence is admitted to clarify the facts in dispute, and are not limited to examining already submitted documents.

 

Click here for English translation

Click here for other translation

Related Guidelines

TPG2022 Chapter V paragraph 5.2This chapter provides guidance for tax administrations to take into account in developing rules and/or procedures on documentation to be obtained from taxpayers in connection with a transfer pricing enquiry or risk assessment. It also provides guidance to assist taxpayers in identifying documentation that would be most helpful in showing...
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.83Small to medium sized enterprises are entering into the area of transfer pricing and the number of cross-border transactions is ever increasing. Although the arm’s length principle applies equally to small and medium sized enterprises and transactions, pragmatic solutions may be appropriate in order to make it possible to find...
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.82It is a good practice for taxpayers to set up a process to establish, monitor and review their transfer prices, taking into account the size of the transactions, their complexity, level of risk involved, and whether they are performed in a stable or changing environment. Such a practical approach would...
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.81When undertaking a comparability analysis, there is no requirement for an exhaustive search of all possible relevant sources of information. Taxpayers and tax administrations should exercise judgment to determine whether particular comparables are reliable....
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.80One question that arises when putting the need for comparability analyses into perspective is the extent of the burden and costs that should be borne by a taxpayer to identify possible comparables and obtain detailed information thereon. It is recognised that the cost of information can be a real concern,...
TPG2022 Chapter IV paragraph 4.17The Commentary on paragraph 2 of Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention makes clear that the State from which a corresponding adjustment is requested should comply with the request only if that State “considers that the figure of adjusted profits correctly reflects what the profits would have been...
TPG2022 Chapter IV paragraph 4.16In practice, neither countries nor taxpayers should misuse the burden of proof in the manner described above. Because of the difficulties with transfer pricing analyses, it would be appropriate for both taxpayers and tax administrations to take special care and to use restraint in relying on the burden of proof...
TPG2022 Chapter IV paragraph 4.15Consider the same facts as in the example in the preceding paragraph. If the burden of proof is again guiding behaviour, a taxpayer in the first jurisdiction being a subsidiary of a taxpayer in the second jurisdiction (notwithstanding the burden of proof and these Guidelines), may be unable or unwilling...
TPG2022 Chapter IV paragraph 4.14When transfer pricing issues are present, the divergent rules on burden of proof among OECD member countries will present serious problems if the strict legal rights implied by those rules are used as a guide for appropriate behaviour. For example, consider the case where the controlled transaction under examination involves...
TPG2022 Chapter IV paragraph 4.13In jurisdictions where the burden of proof is on the taxpayer, tax administrations are generally not at liberty to raise assessments against taxpayers which are not soundly based in law. A tax administration in an OECD member country that applies the arm’s length principle, for example, could not raise an...

Supplemental Guidance

Copyright 2026 TPcases