Facts
The [A. AG] was assessed by the tax administration of the canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden for direct federal tax 2014 and state and municipal taxes 2014 at its discretion. The [A. AG] lodged an objection and requested that the attached tax returns for the years 2013 and 2014 be admitted as evidence and that it be reassessed accordingly.
The tax administration of the canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden confirmed receipt of the documents for the year 2013 and 2014, but requested the [A. AG] to submit a receipt confirmation from the cantonal tax administration regarding the submission of the objection and the non-attached documents for the tax period 2014 by July 18, 2016.
The [A. AG] submitted a copy of the tax return 2014, the annual financial statement 2014, and further documents. The tax administration declined to consider the objection with two separate decisions of November 16, 2016, regarding the state and municipal taxes 2014 and the federal tax 2014, respectively.
The High Court of the canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden dismissed the complaint against these decisions. The [A. AG] lodged a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court in public law matters.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined the complaint and came to the conclusion that the lower court had violated the principle of investigation and the general rules of evidence according to Art. 8 CC and had carried out an arbitrary assessment of the evidence.
The complainant had provided evidence that it had submitted the documents for the year 2014 in good time by referring to the receipt confirmation from the tax administration of May 20, 2016. The tax administration had confirmed receipt of the documents but later claimed that no documents for the year 2014 had been received.
The Federal Supreme Court found that the tax administration should bear the burden of proof for the non-submission of the documents, as it had confirmed receipt of the documents. The lower court had wrongly assumed that…