Tax Court

That is, not that the Tax Administration have legitimate generic ad causam in court to demand the annulment of its own resolutions, but against breaches the administrative and general interest (double injury), that power must be exceptional because it occurred in administrative vesting. On this subject, and in 1995 Armando Zolezzi said he considered proper for the Tax Administration to defend their decisions before the Tax Court, but that such power should not extend to the judiciary or in any case be limited to exceptional cases, otherwise , taxpayers’ risked confiscate their triumphs in the Tax Court. ” However, some other authors have said that granting such powers to the Tax “positive law, Peru has set a legal absurdity it is not conceivable from the perspective of law that an administrative body is vested with standing to sue in judicial immunity to his superior. ” Within that group, Humberto Medrano has argued that such a provision establishing the “unusual” situation that the lower hierarchy is allowed to challenge the decisions of higher being worse than the cause is treated as a dispute between the Administration and the Court, without notice at all to the taxpayer, even though this is the directly affected. Other authors believe that this does not justify special treatment in tax matters as early as 27 444 Law is regulated Nu detrimental action to demand the annulment of decisions of specialized courts lack the power to officially declare the nullity of his acts, as Article 157u contains a clear attack on the legal certainty that the taxpayer is entitled. .