Bibliographic citations
Esquivel, P., Garcia, A. (2024). Análisis sobre la notificación en los procedimientos tributarios (Exp. N° 03394-2021-PA/TC [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/683552
Esquivel, P., Garcia, A. Análisis sobre la notificación en los procedimientos tributarios (Exp. N° 03394-2021-PA/TC [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/683552
@misc{renati/1300616,
title = "Análisis sobre la notificación en los procedimientos tributarios (Exp. N° 03394-2021-PA/TC",
author = "Garcia Espinoza, Aderly Roger",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2024"
}
This professional sufficiency report is based on the study of the Ruling issued by the Constitutional Court (hereinafter, “TC”), dictated in the framework of the deliberations corresponding to Case 03394-2021-PA/TC. In this case, an amparo lawsuit was filed in order to obtain the nullity of a Coactive Resolution issued in a Coactive Enforcement Proceeding by the National Superintendence of Customs and Tax Administration (hereinafter, 'SUNAT' or 'Tax Administration'), after the appellant had been prevented from correcting an admissibility requirement of his appeal in order to have access to the double instance in the administrative proceedings. The TC finally decided, in majority, to declare the appeal of constitutional grievance FOUNDED, thus rendering the notification of the resolution of the intendancy and of the coercive resolutions NULL and VOID. Likewise, there were two voting grounds and a singular vote on what was decided. In this sense, this work of sufficiency has the objective of analyzing the notification of tax administrative acts in relation to the rights of defense, as well as the discretionary power of SUNAT, based on the arguments of the TC. Finally, a controversy is evidenced around the normative analysis of the article that regulates the notification and its application in tax matters. In addition, three questions are raised regarding the ruling
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License