Winning the Appeal: Testing the Time Limit for Disclosure of Untruth Before the Issuance of Tax Assessment

Legal Dispute Analysis: Hierarchy of Laws in Tax Disclosure

The dispute centers on the validity of disclosing untruthful tax returns for VAT periods conducted after the issuance of the Tax Audit Result Notice (SPHP) but prior to the Tax Assessment Letter (SKP). The core conflict arose when the Respondent rejected the Petitioner's disclosure, citing a violation of Article 8 (1) of Government Regulation (PP) 74/2011, which limits disclosures to the period before SPHP delivery.

The Conflict: PP 74/2011 vs. KUP Law

The Respondent argued that such disclosure lacked the essence of "voluntary disclosure" as audit findings already existed. Conversely, the Petitioner argumentatively asserted that Article 8 (4) of the KUP Law explicitly allows disclosure as long as the tax assessment letter has not been issued.

Judicial Review: Supremacy of the KUP Law

The Board of Judges provided a crucial legal resolution by applying the principle of hierarchy of laws and regulations under Law 12/2011. In its consideration, the Board stated that norms in the Law (KUP) hold a higher position and cannot be annulled by lower-level regulations (PP).

Implications: Constitutional Rights of Taxpayers

Since the Petitioner submitted the disclosure and paid the underpaid tax before the SKPN was issued, the Board overturned the Respondent's correction. This ruling reinforces the taxpayer's constitutional right to make corrections or disclosures as long as the statutory deadline in the Law has not passed. The implication is that tax authorities cannot restrict taxpayer rights through implementing regulations that contradict the primary Law.

Conclusion: The Board of Judges prioritized the KUP Law over the Government Regulation, affirming that administrative procedures must yield to the substantive rights guaranteed by higher-level statutes.