Whether the tax authority's receipt of special consumption tax, etc. voluntarily reported and paid is a taxation disposition (negative)

The special consumption tax is, in principle, tax based on the tax base and the amount of tax determined by the tax return. However, only when a taxpayer fails to make a voluntary return within the statutory period or the amount of tax is short of the amount to be paid, it can be deemed tax by the method of tax payment. Therefore, if a taxpayer pays the special consumption tax and the defense tax by the voluntary return method, the tax authority’s receipt of such tax cannot be deemed a mere factual act and a confirm

Articles 9, 10, and 11 of the Special Consumption Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 88Nu5877 Decided May 23, 1989 (Gong1989,1017) 88Nu12066 Decided September 12, 1989 (Gong1989,1502)

Second Electronic Warning Corporation

Head of Seoul Customs Office

Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu524 delivered on January 13, 1988

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In the method of tax return and payment, if the taxpayer voluntarily pays the tax, the tax to be paid by the tax authority is merely a factual act and there is no room to recognize the existence of a confirmatory tax disposition.

However, according to Articles 9(2), 10(2), and 11(1) of the Special Consumption Tax Act, where a person who takes out taxable goods from a bonded area files an import declaration with the head of a customs office, the person shall be deemed to have filed the tax base declaration; and the special consumption tax shall be paid to goods taken out from a bonded area when the import declaration is granted to the Government; where a declaration under Article 9 is not filed or there is an error or omission in the details of the declaration, the head of the competent tax office or customs office shall determine or rectify the tax base and tax rate; and Article 13(1) of the same Act provides that where a taxpayer of the special consumption tax fails to pay the special consumption tax within the period prescribed under Article 10 or pays the special consumption tax short of the amount that should have been paid, the additional tax shall be collected if the purport of each provision is gathered, in principle, based on the tax base and tax return method fixed by the special consumption tax return; Provided, That where the taxpayer fails to make the voluntary declaration within the statutory period or the amount of tax payable falls short of tax payable (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Nu98.7.88.

In the same purport, on August 25, 1986, the court below, based on the adopted evidence, declared that the plaintiff did not have the tax amount payable for the television camera of this case on August 27, 1986, but decided upon the defendant's recommendation, recognized the fact that the plaintiff voluntarily paid the tax amount along with the tax base, tax rate, and revised tax return on the tax amount, and paid the tax amount in accordance with the voluntary declaration method not by the method of tax payment, it cannot be deemed that the defendant's act of receiving the special consumption tax of this case and the defense tax of this case cannot be deemed as a tax assessment. Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case seeking its revocation on the premise that the existence of the tax disposition of this case exists, is just and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles on the interpretation of the Special Consumption Tax Act or the Special Consumption Tax Act.

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 on the bench.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won