Tax legislation has incorporated various mechanisms to guarantee taxpayers’ rights and provide an equitable justice system in tax matters. These means of defense have evolved significantly since the establishment of the tax system in the country.
In tax matters, the principal means of defense are those specified below:
- Administrative Appeal for Revocation
- Administrative Trial
- Amparo Trial
These means of defense in tax matters aim to ensure that taxpayers have the ability to challenge administrative actions they consider illegal, thereby protecting their rights.
Now, the Revocation Appeal is an administrative means of defense that allows taxpayers to contest administrative actions issued by tax authorities. Its primary purpose is to revoke the action, rendering it ineffective due to the illegalities raised in the process.
This appeal is primarily regulated in the Federal Tax Code (CFF) and is an optional instance, typically used prior to judicial action. Taxpayers, after meeting certain requirements, specify through this appeal the action they are contesting, along with their grounds for grievance and evidence. They request the tax authority itself to revoke its resolutions, effectively nullifying them based on their arguments. This implies that the authority must conduct a new analysis of the action deemed illegal.
Taxpayers can file an appeal for revocation against:
- Final resolutions issued by federal tax authorities.
- Administrative acts that determine contributions, accessories, or deny the refund of amounts paid unduly.
- Acts that impose fines for violations of tax provisions.
- Acts that require the payment of tax credits when the taxpayer disputes the existence of the credit or the assessment made.
- Administrative acts that affect their legal interests.
Once submitted through the Tax Mailbox, the tax authority has a period of three months to resolve the revocation appeal. If it does not do so within this period, the appellant may consider that the resolution has been negative (fictitious negative) and appeal to the Federal Administrative Justice Court (TFJA).
The resolution that concludes the revocation appeal may:
- Dismiss it as inadmissible, consider it as not filed, or discontinue it, as applicable.
- Confirm the contested act.
- Order to restore the administrative procedure or to issue a new resolution.
- Nullify the contested act.
When the contested act is nullified due to the incompetence of the authority that issued the act, the corresponding resolution will declare the nullity in a straightforward manner.
The Nullity Trial is a fundamental legal recourse in Mexico’s fiscal and administrative system. This means of defense allows taxpayers to challenge definitive administrative acts issued by fiscal and administrative authorities that they believe are contrary to the law or that affect their rights.
Unlike the revocation resource, which is resolved by the administrative authority that issued the act considered illegal, the Federal Court of Administrative Justice (TFJA) is the body responsible for resolving these trials, thereby ensuring legality and justice in administrative decisions.
Considered the ideal means of defense, the Nullity Trial ensures that administrative and tax decisions are reviewed by an independent and specialized judicial body, guaranteeing legality and justice in the actions of the authorities.
The TFJA can issue rulings in which it can:
- Confirm the validity of the challenged administrative act;
- Declare the total or partial nullity of the challenged act;
- Order the reinstatement of the administrative procedure;
- Order a nullity for effects.
Finally, regarding the Amparo Trial, it is a fundamental legal tool in the Mexican legal system, designed to protect the human rights and constitutional guarantees of individuals against acts of authority that violate them.
There are two main types of amparo proceedings: direct and indirect. In the administrative and tax context, amparo is particularly relevant for taxpayers seeking to challenge acts of authority that violate their fundamental rights, whether or not these acts constitute final rulings, depending on the legal circumstances
The first of these, the Direct Amparo Proceeding, is a legal remedy for taxpayers to appeal unfavorable final rulings issued by the Federal Court of Administrative Justice (TFJA) in a nullity trial. This allows for an additional review, functioning as a second instance in which the Collegiate Courts assess the constitutionality of these rulings issued by the Administrative Chambers, ensuring comprehensive protection of the taxpayer’s rights.
On the other hand, the Indirect Amparo Proceeding is a legal remedy used to challenge acts of authority that do not constitute final rulings, awards, or decisions that conclude a trial. In the administrative and tax context, indirect amparo allows taxpayers to contest administrative acts they believe infringe upon their rights and guarantees.
Some examples include:
1- Administrative Acts:
- Provisional resolutions, orders for inspection or tax audit, information requests, temporary closure of establishments, among others.
2- Execution Acts:
- Precautionary seizures, freezing of bank accounts, orders for restriction of commercial operations, among others.
3- Acts of Application of General Norms:
- Application of regulations, decrees, circulars, or any normative provisions that affect the rights of the taxpayer.
4- Negative Responses or Unjustified Delays:
- Rejections of tax refunds, delays in the resolution of tax procedures, among others
The indirect amparo trial is vital for taxpayers as it allows them to defend themselves against acts of authority that they consider violations of their constitutional rights, ensuring that their individual guarantees are respected. It provides judicial oversight over the actions of tax and administrative authorities, guaranteeing that these acts comply with legality and the Constitution.
The indirect amparo trial is vital for taxpayers as it allows them to defend themselves against acts of authority that they consider violations of their constitutional rights, ensuring that their individual guarantees are respected. It provides judicial oversight over the actions of tax and administrative authorities, guaranteeing that these acts comply with legality and the Constitution.
As specialists in Legal Tax and Customs Defense, ST Stratego integrates extensive experience in both the public and private sectors, enabling us to ensure the implementation of intelligent and innovative strategies for litigation and complex matters.
Request more information about our success stories.