Citas bibligráficas
De, C., Moreno, D. (2024). Informe de opinión respecto al proceso contencioso tributario vinculado al expediente No.04244-2019-0-1801-JR-CA-18 [Universidad del Pacífico]. https://hdl.handle.net/11354/4668
De, C., Moreno, D. Informe de opinión respecto al proceso contencioso tributario vinculado al expediente No.04244-2019-0-1801-JR-CA-18 []. PE: Universidad del Pacífico; 2024. https://hdl.handle.net/11354/4668
@misc{renati/1032223,
title = "Informe de opinión respecto al proceso contencioso tributario vinculado al expediente No.04244-2019-0-1801-JR-CA-18",
author = "Moreno Sékula, Danica",
publisher = "Universidad del Pacífico",
year = "2024"
}
This report analyzes the positions contained in file No.4244-2019-0-1801-JR-CA-18, related to the tax audit procedure concerning the Income Tax on non-residents for the periods from January to December of the 2016 fiscal year, initiated by the peruvian Tax Administration - Superintendencia Nacional de Aduanas y de Administración Tributaria (hereinafter, “SUNAT”, for its acronym in Spanish, or the “Tax Administration”) - against the company Fitesa Perú S.A.C. (hereinafter, the “Company” or “FITESA PERÚ”). In this regard, as a result of the audit procedure, the Tax Administration adjusted the amount of S/602,280, considering that the commissions paid to the Company’s suppliers, for acting as guarantors, were subject to the Income Tax on non-residents, pursuant to the provision set forth in subsection (c) of Article 9 of the Income Tax Law. The Company, disagreeing with the adjustment and the sanction, decided to initiate an administrative contentious procedure, which escalated to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the Tax Administration’s position regarding the guarantee commissions paid by the Company. However, it established a binding precedent concerning the timing for the issuance of the residency certificate.
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons