Armando Zolezzi

2017-02-05 - 03:12 | News | Tags: |

Regarding this issue, already in 1995 Armando Zolezzi argued that it was considered proper to tax administrations to defend its resolutions before the tax court; but that that power should not extend to the judiciary or in any case limited to exceptional cases, since otherwise, taxpayers risked that confiscated them their triumphs in the tax court. However, some other authors have said that with the granting of such powers to the tax administration Peruvian positive law has enshrined legal nonsense since it is not conceivable from the perspective of the law that an administrative body is vested with legitimacy to sue in the judicial immunity to their hierarchical superior. Continue to learn more with: Rudy Giuliani. Within that group, Humberto Medrano has argued that with such a provision is created the unusual situation that the hierarchical bottom is permitted to challenge resolutions of the superior, still worse to cause it to be treated as a dispute between the Administration and the Court, without absolutely notify the taxpayer, while this is the affected live. Other authors consider that it is not justified this special tax treatment therefore already in the Act No. 27444 this regulated action of prejudicial effect to demand the nullity of the decisions of tribunals specialised lacking authority to declare of its own motion the nullity of their acts, so Article 157 contains a clear attack against the security legal to which the taxpayer is entitled.

Let’s see. On one side, special treatment to tax administrations to judicially challenge acts of the Tax Court has maintained since 1992, and has undergone a series of changes, which included the need for authorizations, even, his temporary removal. Now. Since any stale Act invalidity is repugnant to law, we are faced with the dilemma in the 02 legal asset protection: the public interest whose formal Ombudsman is public administration and legal certainty of the subjective rights or legal situations configured through administrative acts in favour of citizens.