Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
López, M., (2021). El pago por incumplimiento contractual ¿Gasto deducible o liberalidad? [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/19959
López, M., El pago por incumplimiento contractual ¿Gasto deducible o liberalidad? []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2021. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/19959
@misc{renati/529934,
title = "El pago por incumplimiento contractual ¿Gasto deducible o liberalidad?",
author = "López Orihuela, Moises Leonardo",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2021"
}
Title: El pago por incumplimiento contractual ¿Gasto deducible o liberalidad?
Authors(s): López Orihuela, Moises Leonardo
Advisor(s): Viacava Paredes, Gloria María
Keywords: Derecho tributario--Jurisprudencia--Perú; Impuesto a la renta--Jurisprudencia--Perú; Causalidad (Derecho); Contratos--Incumplimiento--Perú
OCDE field: http://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01
Issue Date: 13-Aug-2021
Institution: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract: En el presente trabajo, se determina cuáles son los criterios necesarios y válidos para
considerar a un gasto por pago de incumplimiento contractual proveniente de una
cláusula penal como deducible. De esta manera, se dará tratamiento a los alcances que
tiene el “Principio de Causalidad” en materia tributaria, desarrollando particularmente
cual es el tratamiento respecto al Impuesto a la Renta peruano de tercera categoría y que
implica el “Principio de Fehaciencia” en servicio de la deducción de gastos. Ubicándose
como punto de debate como es que el pago generado por penalidad contractual puede
cumplir con ambos principios a fin de ser deducible, que como se verá consistirá en
realizar una correcta interpretación de las normas pertinentes.
La estructura a desarrollarse parte de analizar la Sentencia de Casación No. 8327-2015-
LIMA, de fecha 18 de mayo de 2017, emitida por la Corte Suprema, en la cual se ve
reflejada la posición sobre la problemática tanto de un contribuyente, como la
Administración Tributaria, el Tribunal Fiscal y el Poder Judicial. De manera que, luego
de comentarse los hechos y argumentos en la sentencia, se cuestionará el tratamiento y
criterios dados por las partes, al mismo tiempo que se logrará visibilizar cuales son los
límites que emanan de las normas respecto a la deducción de gastos en el caso.
In the present work, it is determined which are the necessary and valid criteria to consider an expense for payment of contractual breach from a penal clause as a deductible. In this way, treatment will be given to the scope of the “Principle of Causality“ in tax matters, particularly developing what is the treatment regarding third category Peruvian Income Tax and that implies the “Principle of Reliability“ in service of the deduction of expenses. Positioning itself as a point of debate as is that the payment generated by contractual penalty can comply with both principles in order to be deductible, which, as will be seen, will consist of making a correct interpretation of the pertinent regulations. The structure to be developed starts from analyzing the “Sentencia de Casación No. 8327-2015-LIMA”, dated May 18, 2017, which reflects the position on the problem of both a taxpayer, such as the Tax Administration, the Court Prosecutor and the Judiciary. Thus, after commenting on the facts and arguments in the judgment, the treatment and criteria given by the parties will be questioned, at the same time that it will be possible to make visible what are the limits that emanate from the rules regarding the deduction of expenses in the case.
In the present work, it is determined which are the necessary and valid criteria to consider an expense for payment of contractual breach from a penal clause as a deductible. In this way, treatment will be given to the scope of the “Principle of Causality“ in tax matters, particularly developing what is the treatment regarding third category Peruvian Income Tax and that implies the “Principle of Reliability“ in service of the deduction of expenses. Positioning itself as a point of debate as is that the payment generated by contractual penalty can comply with both principles in order to be deductible, which, as will be seen, will consist of making a correct interpretation of the pertinent regulations. The structure to be developed starts from analyzing the “Sentencia de Casación No. 8327-2015-LIMA”, dated May 18, 2017, which reflects the position on the problem of both a taxpayer, such as the Tax Administration, the Court Prosecutor and the Judiciary. Thus, after commenting on the facts and arguments in the judgment, the treatment and criteria given by the parties will be questioned, at the same time that it will be possible to make visible what are the limits that emanate from the rules regarding the deduction of expenses in the case.
Link to repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/19959
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Derecho.
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Viacava Paredes, Gloría María; Durán Rojo, Luis; Adriazola Burga, Alexa
Register date: 13-Aug-2021
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.