Order No. 22171 of 2024: Inadmissibility of Appeals Against Cadastral Rectifications

The recent Order No. 22171 of August 6, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important clarifications regarding the appeal of cadastral rectification acts. Specifically, the Court declared an appeal against a conservative self-correction rectification act inadmissible, emphasizing the taxpayer's lack of standing to sue. But what does this mean in practical terms?

Context of the Ruling

In this order, the Court addressed a case where the Administration had reduced the value and cadastral income of a property previously assigned, acting on its own initiative. The central issue was whether the taxpayer could appeal this rectification. The Court ruled that there is no standing to sue, as it constitutes a mere partial revocation of the previous measure. This implies that, even if the original measure had been appealed, its subsequent rectification cannot be considered a new, independent act.

Headnote of the Ruling

In general. In matters of tax litigation, an appeal against a cadastral rectification act, by which the Administration has merely reduced, through conservative self-correction, the value and cadastral income of the property previously assigned, is inadmissible due to lack of standing to sue, as it constitutes a mere partial revocation of the previous measure and, therefore, lacks novelty and is attributable to the original act, whose fate it follows, not only if the latter has become final but also if it has been duly appealed.

This headnote highlights how the Administration, in cases of self-correction rectifications, cannot be subject to litigation unless there is a substantial change compared to the original measure. The Court emphasizes the importance of the "pay first, then contest" principle in tax litigation, according to which the taxpayer must first pay and then challenge.

Practical Implications

This decision has several implications for taxpayers:

• Recognition of the limited possibility of appealing cadastral rectifications.
• The need to carefully assess standing to sue before proceeding with an appeal.
• A potential reduction in tax litigation, as many appeals may be deemed inadmissible.

In conclusion, Order No. 22171 of the Court of Cassation represents an important clarification on the subject of the appealability of cadastral rectifications, highlighting the need for a concrete interest to sue in tax litigation.