[양도소득세등부과처분취소][공1993.8.15.(950),2047]
Whether Article 55(4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes applies to a case where a person who has received a tax imposition disposition files a request for review with the Board of Audit and Inspection after he/she received a decision of dismissal (affirmative)
In calculating the period to be filed under the Board of Audit and Inspection Act with respect to a disposition imposing taxes, the provisions of Article 55 (4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes shall be deemed to have priority over Article 44 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act. As such, in cases where a person subject to a disposition imposing taxes makes a request for examination under the Board of Audit and Inspection Act, he/she shall file a request for examination within the period as prescribed by Article 55 (4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes,
Article 5 (4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 44 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act
Plaintiff
Head of Nowon Tax Office
Seoul High Court Decision 92Gu25849 delivered on January 19, 1993
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.
In calculating the period for which a request for examination under the Board of Audit and Inspection Act is to be filed, the provisions of Article 55 (4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes shall be deemed to be preferentially applied to the Board of Audit and Inspection Act in calculating the period for which a request for examination is to be filed under the Board of Audit and Inspection Act. Thus, a request for examination under the Board of Audit and Inspection Act shall be filed within the period as stipulated under Article 55 (4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and it shall not be deemed that the case where a person subject to the disposition for tax imposition files an objection with the disposition agency before the said request for examination, and it shall be deemed that the request for examination filed by the Board of Audit and Inspection after the lapse of 60 days from the notice of the disposition
In addition, in filing a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case, even if the disposition of this case is void automatically, it must go through the procedure of the previous trial, and therefore, it is not reasonable to discuss any other argument.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)