المستخلص: |
summary, in the direction of the administrative judiciary, regarding the beginning of calculating the deadline for appealing the criminal decision and the distinction between the administration and the binding, that the requirements of Article 242 of the General Tax Code, in its current form, represent a time interval for a historical era, the first of which believes in the centrality of the state. With its unfamiliar means in private law represented in coercion and coercion, and secondly, it believes in the culture of human rights with its philosophy of liberation from the grip of the state as a public authority, and seeking to deal with the matter by the mechanisms of private law, i.e. the equality of legal positions between the binding and the tax administration as well. If it comes to litigation between properties. The right to appeal in the tax administration is restricted without the obligation, and in certain cases (the committee decides on legal issues), passing through its right to appeal after the collection order is issued, passing through the right to choose between issuing the extraction order and reaching a decision of one of the committees, leading to the unification of the appeal period in sixty days from The two parties to the tax litigation reached the decision of one of the committees. The administrative judiciary was its driver and the real actor in its development, as it did everything in its power to reconcile the public interest with the private interests of the obligated, which by meeting the public interest.
|