There’s a common view that customs-related disputes cannot be brought as lawsuits in the Tax Court due to a supposed lack of legal provision. This perspective largely stems from Customs Law No. 17 of 2006, where Article 95 only regulates appeals, with no explicit mention of lawsuits. Yet, is it accurate to assume that customs lawsuits are entirely barred from the Tax Court?

A critical but often overlooked provision in this discussion is Article 49 of the KUP Law, which states:
“The provisions in this Law shall also apply to other taxation laws unless otherwise specified”
This indicates that the general regulations under the KUP Law extend to other tax-related laws, including customs law, where specific rules may be absent. Therefore, in the absence of explicit guidelines on customs lawsuits in the Customs Law, Article 49 potentially allows general KUP provisions to govern customs-related disputes.

Further support for this view is found in the Tax Court Law, specifically Article 1 (2), which defines “tax” as: “All types of taxes collected by the Central Government, including import duties and excise, and taxes collected by regional governments.”
By this definition, customs duties (import/export) qualify as central government taxes. Therefore, customs duties fall within the Tax Court’s jurisdiction, based on the inclusive interpretation of “tax.”

A legal principle supporting this interpretation is Generalia Sunt Praeponenda Singularibus — meaning “general laws apply where specific laws do not address certain issues.” Since the Customs Law doesn’t provide specific guidelines for lawsuits in the Tax Court, Article 49 of the KUP Law implies that the general rules of the KUP Law should apply to customs cases. Consequently, Article 23 of the KUP Law could serve as the legal basis for submitting customs-related lawsuits to the Tax Court.

Historically, many Tax Court rulings have dismissed customs lawsuits, often referencing Article 6(1) of the Customs Law. This article notes that all imported/exported goods are subject to customs regulations enforced by the DGCE. However, this interpretation could benefit from a more detailed reading. The Customs Law serves as a lex specialis strictly in relation to customs obligations tied to customs clearance, which is enforced by the DGCE. This scope implies that Article 6(1) applies only to the customs clearance process, not the Tax Court’s jurisdiction over customs disputes.

In essence, submitting a customs lawsuit in Tax Court may find grounding by relying on Article 49 of the KUP Law. By showing that Article 6(1) of the Customs Law only applies to customs clearance, it becomes clear that it doesn’t block customs lawsuits in Tax Court, potentially allowing the court to hear these cases.

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