Burden of Proof in Tax Lawsuit-Emphasis on Business Tax

• Main Authors: Jui-Chen, Chan, 詹瑞禎
• Other Authors: Mei-Juh Huang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2012
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/ecd83c

碩士 === 輔仁大學 === 會計學系碩士班 === 100 === Pursuant to Article 35 of the Tax Collection Act(“Act”), a taxpayer disagreeing with the decision made in a tax assessment notice is required to first file an application with the tax collection authorities making such decision for re-examination, and if further disagreeing with the result of the re-examination, he/she may then file an administrative appeal and initiate an administrative litigation in accordance with Article 38 of the Act. The taxable disposition was illegal when the existence of taxable facts identified errors. Therefore, tax administrative remedy is a balancing measure between the fundamental rights and obligations of taxpayers. This study uses the rulings of the Taipei high administrative court from 2009 to 2011 as a sample. First of all a collection and summary of the legislative laws’ content, the number of quotes and the ruling situations themselves, summing up the three major disputed business tax violations, namely ‘violation of given or retrieved receipt punishment’, ‘shortage or loss of business revenue’ and ‘false declaration of tax’. And then, in accordance to the individual dispute items, select the more representative rulings or those of discussion value, in lawsuit revoked and lawsuit denied, respectively. Using these as samples, conduct an analysis study in accordance to factual summaries, disputed issue, claims of plaintiff, claims of respondent, ruling reason and its evaluation. The purpose of this study is hoping to bring improvement suggestions towards the current tax system, relevant laws, burden of proof, obligation of cooperation and regulations as well as its execution. As well as serve as a reference towards the taxation authority’s ruling in taxation administrative cases.