The principle of fairness in granting interest compensation reached a tipping point in the case of PT AICC, who claimed IDR 2.9 billion in interest. This dispute centers on the interpretation of Article 27B of the KUP Law, introduced via the Omnibus Law (UU Cipta Kerja).
PT AICC requested interest rewards for an overpayment resulting from a 2016 Corporate Income Tax appeal. The DGT rejected the request, arguing that under the new Omnibus Law regime, interest is only granted if the original Tax Return (SPT) declared an overpayment. Since AICC's initial 2016 SPT showed an underpayment, the DGT claimed they were ineligible. The Plaintiff argued that the old Article 27A (pre-Omnibus) should apply to a 2016 dispute.
The Board of Judges emphasized that the applicable norms are those in effect at the time the decision is pronounced. Because the Appeal Decision was rendered in August 2022 (post-Omnibus Law), the transitional provisions of PMK-18/2021 were applied. The Court invoked the principle of lex posterior derogat legi priori, ruling that the new Article 27B overrides the old rules, effectively limiting interest rewards to taxpayers who were in an "Overpayment" position from the start.
This decision serves as a stark warning: a material victory in court no longer guarantees interest compensation. Litigation strategies must now account for the "validity theory" and shifting transitional regulations. Taxpayers must realize that their initial SPT profile is now a decisive factor in determining whether a court victory will include a 2% per month financial "bonus."
In conclusion, the Court’s decision to uphold the rejection of interest rewards reinforces the restrictive nature of the Omnibus Law regarding state expenditures. For energy and infrastructure players, this underscores the importance of accurate tax positioning from the very first filing of the SPT.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id