Commentary on Judgment No. 9759 of 2024: The Legitimacy of Tax Collection Notices According to Article 36-bis of the Presidential Decree No. 600

The Court of Cassation, with Order No. 9759 of April 11, 2024, addressed a crucial issue in tax law: the legitimacy of tax collection notices issued by the Revenue Agency concerning tax credits. The decision is set within a complex legal context, intertwining the interpretation of tax regulations and the defense rights of taxpayers.

The Case Addressed by the Court

The Court rejected the appeal of the Attorney General's Office, confirming the nullity of a tax collection notice issued under Article 36-bis of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973. The notice in question had been issued by the Revenue Agency to dispute a tax credit, without any prior notice being sent to the taxpayer. This aspect is fundamental: the documentation control provided by this article cannot resolve legal issues, such as the dispute of credits.

Notice under Article 36-bis of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973 - Dispute on the interpretation of a legal provision - Legitimacy - Exclusion - Basis - Case. The registration of the higher tax, pursuant to Articles 36-bis of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973 and 54-bis of Presidential Decree No. 633 of 1972, is admissible only when the due amount is determined through a mere documentary control, based on data provided by the taxpayer or a correction of material or calculation errors, and cannot, in this way, resolve legal issues, for which the disallowance by the Tax Administration of a tax credit cannot occur through the issuance of a payment notice regarding the relevant amount, without being preceded by a notice, even if only a friendly one, for the recovery of that credit. (In this case, the Supreme Court rejected the appeal against the contested ruling, which had correctly declared the nullity of the notice under Article 36-bis of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973, with which the Revenue Agency had disallowed the credit from suspended payments exceeding the tax due, resolving an interpretative conflict between two different provisions from the director of the same Agency, and proceeded with its recovery, without having sent the taxpayer a prior notice regarding the outcome of the automated control procedure).

The Legal Implications of the Ruling

This ruling has significant implications for taxpayers and the Tax Administration. In particular:

  • It reaffirms the principle that the issuance of a tax collection notice must be preceded by a notice, even if only a friendly one, to ensure the taxpayer's right to defense.
  • It clarifies that documentary control cannot resolve complex legal issues, such as the disallowance of tax credits.
  • It strengthens the need for a uniform interpretation of regulations by the Revenue Agency, avoiding conflicts between different provisions.

Conclusions

The Court of Cassation, with this order, sends a clear message to both taxpayers and the Tax Administration: transparency and respect for procedures are fundamental for a fair and equitable tax system. The importance of a prior notice is not merely a formality, but an essential element for ensuring the right to defense and the correctness of the administrative procedure. This represents an important step towards greater protection of taxpayer rights and better management of tax disputes.

Bianucci Law Firm