Unlawfully obtained evidence follow the Court of Justice of the European Union if you please Mirugia Richardson
By: Richardson, Mirugia
.
Material type: 
ArticlePublisher: 2021Subject(s): ADMINISTRACION TRIBUTARIA | PROCEDIMIENTO ECONOMICO ADMINISTRATIVO | PRUEBA | TRIBUNAL DE JUSTICIA DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS | UNION EUROPEA | JURISPRUDENCIA
In:
EC Tax Review v. 30, n. 5-6, December 2021, p. 262-269Summary: This contribution addresses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the issue of the use of unlawfully obtained evidence by the tax authorities in an administrative procedure. In 2015 in the value added tax (VAT) case WebMindLicences the CJEU has set the conditions for excluding evidence in an administrative procedure if that evidence was obtained or used in violation of the law. The highest courts of the neighbouring European Union (EU) Member States Belgium and the Netherlands had already developed in their case-law before the CJEU’s judgment in WebMindlicenses their own legal standard on the exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence in tax cases. The author contributes to the discussion on whether national courts can maintain their own viewpoint or have to conform to the CJEU’s legal standard for excluding evidence in administrative procedures concerning tax, for the harmonized VAT as well as for the non-harmonized taxes.
| Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Artículos | IEF | IEF | OP 2141-B/2021/5/6-7 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 2141-B/2021/5/6-7 |
Browsing IEF Shelves Close shelf browser
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| OP 2141-B/2021/5/6-4 The design of Covid-19 recovery contributions | OP 2141-B/2021/5/6-5 Article 6 ATAD and "non-genuineness" of arrangements | OP 2141-B/2021/5/6-6 The (absence of) Member State autonomy in the interpretation of DAC6 | OP 2141-B/2021/5/6-7 Unlawfully obtained evidence | OP 2141-B/2022/1 EC Tax Review | OP 2141-B/2022/1-1 Good intentions and a call for higher speed on the bumpy road to carbon neutrality | OP 2141-B/2022/1-2 The General Court's judgment in Engie |
Resumen.
This contribution addresses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the issue of the use of unlawfully obtained evidence by the tax authorities in an administrative procedure. In 2015 in the value added tax (VAT) case WebMindLicences the CJEU has set the conditions for excluding evidence in an administrative procedure if that evidence was obtained or used in violation of the law. The highest courts of the neighbouring European Union (EU) Member States Belgium and the Netherlands had already developed in their case-law before the CJEU’s judgment in WebMindlicenses their own legal standard on the exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence in tax cases. The author contributes to the discussion on whether national courts can maintain their own viewpoint or have to conform to the CJEU’s legal standard for excluding evidence in administrative procedures concerning tax, for the harmonized VAT as well as for the non-harmonized taxes.
Click on an image to view it in the image viewer
There are no comments for this item.