A recurring question in tax court is whether the DGT can legally revise an objection decision during an ongoing tax court hearing. These amendments typically address clerical errors or procedural issues, but the central question is whether such corrections are legally acceptable after a decision is already under court review.

Views Supporting Corrections During Proceedings
Supporters of allowing the DGT to amend decisions cite Article 16 of the KUP Law, which permits rectification without a time limit, provided there is no additional tax in dispute. This interpretation gives the DGT the flexibility to make corrections to minor errors during court hearings.

Further, Article 31 (2) of the Tax Court Law restricts tax court reviews to the material disputes raised in the appellant’s original objection application. This provision implies that only substantial issues—not minor clerical or formal errors—should be the subject of review. Consequently, proponents argue that if the DGT’s correction does not alter the substance of the appeal, the court should accept it.

Arguments Against Corrections During Tax Court Proceedings
Opponents argue that allowing corrections during tax court hearings goes against Article 26 (1) of the KUP Law, which limits the DGT to a strict 12-month window to issue an objection decision. Amendments after this period risk being seen as legally flawed and could invalidate the decision.

Further, Article 50 of the Tax Court Law explains that if an appeal is unclear or incomplete, the opportunity to provide clarity or completeness can be offered during the trial. The law implies that this chance to clarify or complete an appeal is granted solely to taxpayers, not to the DGT.

Opponents emphasize that mid-hearing corrections disrupt the appellant’s ability to rely on a consistent, clear decision. Allowing the DGT to amend decisions during proceedings introduces unpredictability and may weaken confidence in judicial impartiality.

Trends in Tax Court Rulings
The tax court has addressed this issue in several recent cases, often concluding that minor, non-material errors do not render the objection decision invalid if corrected. Judges have frequently advised taxpayers that, rather than disputing procedural errors through an appeal, they should consider filing a lawsuit under Article 23 (2d) the KUP Law. This article permits the filing of lawsuits against decisions issued without following procedural standards, creating a pathway for handling formal errors separately from material disputes.

In conclusion, the question of whether the DGT can correct an Objection Decision during tax court proceedings remains an evolving issue. Taxpayers must be prepared to navigate this complexity, ensuring their legal arguments are well-positioned to address both material and formal aspects of their appeal effectively.

Disclaimer:
This communication contains general information only. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your tax and finances or your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser. GNV shall not be liable or responsible for any loss or damage whatsoever arising directly or indirectly in connection with any person relying on this communication.

Author : Ahdianto