As Melhores Tattos Genitais

CLOSURE OF COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT IN OUR ordinances

Ordinance TAXES ON BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OF INDUSTRY, TRADE, SERVICES OR SIMILAR KIND (IAE) force, provides for punitive to illicit tax consisting SHUTDOWNS OF ESTABLISHMENTS; penalty or sanction it in most cases is disproportionate to the fault which is intended to punish, since the penalty must respond in a rational and proportionate to the evil entity caused by the wrongful act.

is important to note that contrary to the assumptions embodied in the Organic Tax Code (TOC), this ordinance contains sixteen (16) cases of Closures for Illicit Formal, Plus One (1) by Illicit Material.

However, for the purpose of illustrating the consecration of the indefinite closure in the IAE, I will discuss Article 107 of the Ordinance: " who pay late or later, established in this ordinance shall be punished by a fine tribute to one percent (1%) of those and with temporary closure of three (3) business days or until it meets its fiscal (...) ".

In this regard, we must emphasize that the closure well regulated, is indefinite, because it would not be ordered for a specified number of days, but the lifting of the penalty would be subject to compliance with an obligation; Ordinance creates a situation of legal insecurity and uncertainty, as it seeks to punish " temporary closure ", having paid late, that means, that if a taxpayer pays the council tax, a day after the deadline established by Ordinance, shall be subject" indefinitely "to at any time before an audit or verification, the facility will be closed, because this fact not be remedied, and not the taxpayer be certain of the fate of its fiscal situation facing the City, is always on the lookout to be closed, placing him in a sort of legal limbo, an attack against the principle of legal certainty that should characterize all its own administrative management of a genuine rule of law.

This situation is unacceptable, as the closing sentence is one of the most serious penalties you may get a legal entity, and therefore must be limited to very specific and perfectly lapses defined in the law.

In my opinion, this provision violates the right economic freedom that is embodied, as the extent of closure of establishment for an indefinite period and suspension economic activity would prevent the trader will exercise their business in the Municipality HERES without a valid legal justification, since the closure of his establishment, for an apparently indefinite period, in this case is subject to the payment of alleged debts.

Undoubtedly, this provision violates the right to property enshrined in Article 115 of the Constitution, since it would subtracting an amount of money the assets of the plaintiff that, perhaps, not underpaid.

This is even recognized by the national legislature to dictate the COT, which certainly provides for the punishment for certain offenses closing, but restricted to a maximum of days (usually very brief). To that end, I refer to my readers, by way of illustration, the reading of Articles 101 and 102 of the COT, which provide closures of no more than five (5) and three (3) days, respectively (...)

How To Setup My Zimbra Incoming Mail Server

EXEDENTES COMPENSATION RETENTION

Before developing the point, it should bring up the general principle of law which provides that it is contrary to justice and good faith, the creditor required to debtor the payment of an obligation is liable while the second one. This principle is enshrined in our Civil Code Article 1331. This is the ethical basis underlying the figure of compensation as a means of legal termination of the reciprocal obligations between individuals.

However, Article 49 of the Tax Code (COT) established a ban under which compensation is not enforceable in respect of indirect taxes provides the structure and translation figures the so-called debits and tax credits, such as VAT. Hence, the SENIAT and the Political Administration (SPA) of the Supreme Court upheld the criterion that, based on Article 49 of the COT, it was not possible to compensate taxpayers oppose tax credits to them (from other taxes) in order to extinguish the VAT tax payable for a particular fiscal period.

From the year 2004 in the Law on VAT was introduced: " ordinary taxpayers can recover the surplus to the administration of withholding that apply in terms and conditions established by the respective ruling. If the administrative decision is favorable, authorizes compensation management or disposal of surplus. "

can be seen that while acknowledging the possibility of raising the surplus as compensation, the source is subject to the terms and conditions - exhausting administrative procedures - set in an order sublegal range and tax administration (Administrative Order SANT/2005/0056 SENIAT).

is important to refer to the decision of the SPA of the Supreme Court dated 29 June 2010, in which reading can be inferred that the taxpayer may set up in compensation excess tax withholding to exist in his favor and has not been able to deduct, without having to go to the recovery procedure provided for in the said administrative ruling.

In the specific case, the Board determined that the taxpayer had already begun before the SENIAT the procedure to recover the excess withholding tax not deducted and got no positive response on the application, consideration should be denied, and was entitled to exercise the appropriate remedy, however, the Board stated that in the COT in 2001, the compensation is enforceable without a prior administrative decision of the tax administration to recognize it , so he could have opposed the taxpayer without resorting to the recovery procedure.

According to many experts, this statement would argue that the criterion of the Supreme Court, is optional for the taxpayer to go to the recovery procedure established in the Administrative Order SNAT/2995/0056 to enforce the compensation or giving tax credits, provided they get a favorable response SENIAT, or directly against the compensation of the excess withholding tax not deducted, in which case you must simply notify the administration tax on time in the TOC. THIS IS A FAIR TAX SYSTEM AND EFFICIENT as provided in our Constitution.