Failure to Carefully Determine the Date, DGT Forced to Cancel SKPN PPN: Tax Court Decision Affirms Principle of Legal Certainty for Taxpayers

The issuance of a Tax Assessment Letter (SKP) is the final stage of a series of audit processes that are highly dependent on compliance with the formal procedures stipulated in the General Provisions and Tax Procedures Law (KUP Law) and PMK 17/PMK.03/2013. Every step in the audit, from the submission of the SPHP to the signing of the Final Audit Discussion Report (PAHP), must be carried out carefully and in accordance with administrative standards, because even the slightest deviation can result in the audit results being invalidated. The dispute between PT Khaniz Sukses Perkasa (PT KSP) and the Directorate General of Taxes (DJP) is a concrete example of how administrative negligence, particularly in relation to the determination of the date of the discussion document, can lead to the cancellation of the SKP by the court.

The dispute centered on the date of the Discussion Minutes used as the basis for calculating the three working days for taxpayers to submit a request for Quality Assurance (QA) discussion. The DJP insisted that the PAHP process had been substantially completed on January 8, 2025. Thus, the DGT considers the QA request submitted by PT KSP on January 13, 2025, to be late. Conversely, PT KSP presents strong evidence that the actual signing by the Head of the Jakarta Matraman Tax Office was only carried out on January 9, 2025. This evidence consists of a WhatsApp conversation with the Auditor showing that the soft copy of the minutes was only sent on January 9, 2025, at 09:25, as well as the Auditor's admission in a recording of a meeting on January 21, 2025, confirming that the Head of the Tax Office signed the document on that date. Thus, PT KSP argues that the deadline for submitting the QA was January 13, 2025 (counting working days after the weekend), so that its application was still on time.

This difference in dates is not merely a technical administrative matter, but a fundamental issue because it is directly related to the validity of the QA rejection by the East Jakarta Regional Tax Office. If the QA rejection is based on a date that does not correspond to the facts, then the PAHP process cannot yet be considered legally complete. PT KSP asserts that the DGT has deprived the taxpayer of its procedural rights by prematurely rejecting the QA application and still issuing the December 2023 VAT Tax Assessment Letter on January 24, 2025.

The Tax Court Panel of Judges, after assessing the evidence from both parties, found that the determination of January 8, 2025, was not supported by authentic documents and was in fact contrary to the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff. The Panel concluded that the use of an inaccurate date had resulted in an incorrect calculation of the QA period. As a result, the DGT's rejection of the QA was an inaccurate action and contrary to the Principles of Legal Certainty and Accuracy in the General Principles of Good Governance (AUPB). Because the QA was rejected unlawfully, the PAHP process cannot be considered complete, so the issuance of the VAT Tax Assessment Notice on January 24, 2025, is deemed to have been carried out before all examination procedures were fulfilled. The Panel emphasized that this condition violates Article 36 paragraph (1) letter d of the KUP Law, which states that a SKP issued without following the proper procedures must be revoked.

The conclusion that can be drawn is that this decision provides significant legal protection for taxpayers. PT KSP's success in canceling the SKPN PPN shows that if the tax administration fails to meet careful and accountable procedural standards, taxpayers have an effective legal mechanism, namely a lawsuit, to enforce their rights and cancel formally flawed tax legal products.

A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here