Main Issues
Effect of taxation by a notice of tax payment for which the basis for calculating the amount of tax was omitted (=cancellation)
Summary of Judgment
If the head of the tax office omitted the basis of calculation of the tax amount in imposing the global income tax, the taxation itself becomes illegal and defective and becomes subject to cancellation.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 128 of the Income Tax Act, Article 183 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, Article 9(1) of the National Tax Collection Act, Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 83Nu55 Delivered on April 26, 1983
Plaintiff-Appellant
Plaintiff
Defendant-Appellee
Head of Daegu Tax Office
Judgment of the lower court
Daegu High Court Decision 82Gu143 delivered on February 1, 1983
Text
The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. On the first ground for appeal:
According to Article 128 of the Income Tax Act, the government shall notify the resident in writing as prescribed by the Presidential Decree from August 1 to August 16 each year in accordance with the provisions of Articles 117 through 12 of this Act. Article 183 of the Enforcement Decree provides that notice of tax base, tax rate, and other necessary matters must be given in writing by entering the tax base, tax rate, and other necessary matters in the tax payment notice. According to Article 9 (1) of the National Tax Collection Act, when the head of the tax office or the head of the Si/Gun intends to collect national taxes, he must issue a notice stating the taxpayer's tax year, tax item, tax amount, and calculation basis, payment period, and place of payment. In light of these purport of the above provision, if the defendant omitted the basis for calculation of the tax amount in the global income tax notice of this case, the taxation disposition itself is unlawful, and it is remanded to the court below for determination without the assent of all participating parties (see Supreme Court Decision 83Nu55, Apr. 26, 1983).
Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)