Bagher Gholi, Alireza Entezarinajafabadi, Saeed Shariatifarani,
Volume 11, Issue 39 (10-2024)
Abstract
The Supreme Tax Council, during a theory regarding the responsibility of the tax administration in not objecting to the opinions of the tax boards, has stated that it is not a legal obligation to object to the wrong decision of the board; The responsibility of the officers should be determined within the framework of the executive regulations of Article 219 of the Tax Law. According to them, the cases subject to compensation for damages caused to the government are enumerated in Article 270, according to the mentioned article, failure to object to the opinions of the dispute resolution board is not one of the mentioned cases, therefore, the tax dispute resolution board will be responsible for compensating the damages caused to the government. In this research, which was carried out using a descriptive-analytical method, it was found that Article (270) of the Civil Code was not intended to express civil responsibility, and in any case, if the elements of civil responsibility are realized, the aforementioned responsibility will be achieved, the said article only I have emphasized it. On the other hand, dozens of duties are mentioned in the Taxes Law, which are not explained in Article (219). In principle, dealing with civil liability is not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Tax Council, but within the jurisdiction of the courts. If issuing a wrong decision or not objecting to it is deliberate and knowing, the perpetrator will be responsible for compensation. If both of them or none of them have intention and knowledge, they are equally responsible for compensation. If the negligence of any of them is due to the failure of equipment and systems, he will not be responsible for compensation.
