Judgment No. 9010 of 2024: The Doubling of Tax Assessment Periods and Conditions of Forfeiture

The recent judgment No. 9010 of April 4, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important clarifications regarding the forfeiture periods for the notification of tax assessment notices. In particular, the Court ruled on the issue of the doubling of periods provided for by art. 43, paragraph 3, of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973 and its relationship with the obligation to report a criminal offense, establishing fundamental principles for the financial administration and taxpayers.

The Doubling of Assessment Periods

According to the provisions of art. 43, paragraph 3, of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973, in the presence of serious indications of a crime, the period for notifying assessment notices can be doubled. However, judgment No. 9010 clarifies that this doubling is not cumulative with the two-year extension provided for by art. 10 of Law No. 289 of 2002 for those subjects who could not avail themselves of the tax amnesty.

Implications of the Judgment

The implications of this judgment are manifold and concern both the Administration and taxpayers:

• The doubling of tax assessment periods is subject to the existence of indications of a crime and the obligation to report a criminal offense.
• The non-cumulability with the two-year extension protects taxpayers from an excessive extension of assessment periods.
• The maximum temporal extension provided by the most favorable regulation for the Administration must be considered for forfeiture purposes.

Forfeiture periods - Doubling - Conditions - Obligation to report a criminal offense - Cumulability with the two-year extension under art. 10 of Law No. 289 of 2002 - Exclusion - Maximum temporal extension - Regulation most favorable to the Administration. In matters of tax assessment, the doubling of periods for the notification of assessment notices provided for by art. 43, paragraph 3, of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 1973, in force ratione temporis, in the presence of serious indications of a crime that give rise to the obligation to file a criminal report, is not, in light of the interpretation set forth in judgment No. 247 of 2011 of the Constitutional Court, cumulative with the two-year extension under art. 10 of Law No. 289 of 2002 for subjects who have not availed themselves of the amnesty or could not do so, while the maximum temporal extension provided by the single regulation most favorable to it must be considered for the forfeiture of the Administration's taxing power.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 9010 of 2024 represents an important reference point for managing tax assessments in the presence of indications of a crime. It clarifies the temporal limits within which the Administration can exercise its taxing power, while ensuring greater protection for taxpayers. It is essential for those facing an assessment notice to understand these dynamics and, if necessary, seek the assistance of expert professionals to protect their rights.