The Fisco is always obliged to confront the tax payer before issuing a deed against him (for example a tax assessment, a mortgage registration, an administrative detention, etc …).<\/p>\n
The right to the adversarial, in fact, represents a means of protecting the taxpayer’s reasons as well as an instrument of guaranteeing the “just proceeding”, therefore, its failure to establish entails the illegitimacy of any subsequent act.<\/p>\n
This is what was established by the Provincial Tax Commission of Milan which, with recent ruling, upheld the appeal filed by a taxpayer against a provision to suspend the reimbursement I.V.A. issued by the Milan Revenue Agency (Sentence n.4279 \/ 21\/2017 filed in the secretariat on 20\/06\/2017, Chairman: Dott. Piercamillo DAVIGO, freely visible on www.studiolegalesances.it – \u200b\u200bDocuments section).<\/p>\n
In the specific case, a company had requested the Revenue Agency for the reimbursement of I.V.A. for the tax year 2011.<\/p>\n
This request was rejected by the Office, which issued to the tax payer – and for no reason – a measure of administrative detention with subsequent suspension of the reimbursement I.V.A. due to further alleged tax claims.<\/p>\n
Following this, the company challenged the aforementioned suspension measure before the Provincial Tax Commission of Milan, complaining about a series of defects, including the failure to establish a contradictory estimate with the taxpayer.<\/p>\n
The judges detained the case in decision and pronounced the sentence n.4279 \/ 21\/17 with which they fully upheld the appeal brought by the company, condemning the Office also to pay litigation costs, paid in \u20ac 20,000.00.<\/p>\n
According to the judges of first instance, the preventive comparison tax \/ tax payer is essential to allow the Office to proceed with a subsequent provision “… having to believe that the failure to activate this contradictory endo-procedural involve the nullity … for violation of right to participate in the procedure, also guaranteed by art. 41, 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union … “.<\/p>\n
Therefore, in the light of the foregoing, it follows that the Tax Authority is obliged to establish a preventive contradiction with the taxpayer. EVERY SLEEPING proposes to adopt any provision against him.<\/p>\n
Avv. Matteo Sances<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Dott. Hiroshi Pisanello<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n