Post by nijhumnishita033 on Jan 10, 2024 12:33:02 GMT 1
After the expected barrage of rulings issued in the first instance that, applying the ruling of the Plenary Session of the Constitutional Court of October 26, 2021 , declare the nullity of the tax settlements and oblige the City Councils to return the amount paid by the taxpayer, different The Superior Courts of Justice of our country are already considering the first appeals , under the same argument. Specifically, to the one already commented on in this same STSJ forum of Castilla-La Mancha of November 15, 2021, we must add two new rulings issued on January 25, 2022 by the Contentious-Administrative Chambers of the TSJ of Madrid and Castilla la Mancha. STSJ of Madrid Background In May 2021, the Contentious-Administrative Court No.
1 of Madrid dismissed the lawsuit directed against the settlement of the municipal capital gains tax issued by the Majadahonda City Council (Madrid) to the plaintiff commercial entity, on the occasion of the Phone Number Data transfer of a property located in said town and for an amount of 117,768.54 euros . City council of Majadahonda. (Photo: Diario La Lupa) The reference ruling, applying the doctrine then in force, rejected the appeal on the grounds that there had been an increase in the value of the property revealed by its disposal. Furthermore, in his opinion, the formula for calculating the fee that had been applied in the liquidation was correct.
On November 29, 2021, with the appeal formulated to indicate for voting and ruling pending, the parties were informed to allege the appropriateness regarding the impact in the present case of the aforementioned STC 182/2021, of 26 of October, published on November 25 in the BOE. On the one hand, the appellant requested that the appeal be upheld taking into consideration the declaration of unconstitutionality of arts. 107.1 and 2 of Royal Legislative Decree 2/2004, of March 5, which approves the consolidated text of the Law Regulating Local Treasury . On the other hand, the appealed City Council asked the Chamber not to take into consideration such resolution of our highest court of guarantees "because it annuls a series of precepts related to the formula for calculating the Tax on the Increase in the Value of "Urban Nature Lands that in no way affect the object of this appeal ."
1 of Madrid dismissed the lawsuit directed against the settlement of the municipal capital gains tax issued by the Majadahonda City Council (Madrid) to the plaintiff commercial entity, on the occasion of the Phone Number Data transfer of a property located in said town and for an amount of 117,768.54 euros . City council of Majadahonda. (Photo: Diario La Lupa) The reference ruling, applying the doctrine then in force, rejected the appeal on the grounds that there had been an increase in the value of the property revealed by its disposal. Furthermore, in his opinion, the formula for calculating the fee that had been applied in the liquidation was correct.
On November 29, 2021, with the appeal formulated to indicate for voting and ruling pending, the parties were informed to allege the appropriateness regarding the impact in the present case of the aforementioned STC 182/2021, of 26 of October, published on November 25 in the BOE. On the one hand, the appellant requested that the appeal be upheld taking into consideration the declaration of unconstitutionality of arts. 107.1 and 2 of Royal Legislative Decree 2/2004, of March 5, which approves the consolidated text of the Law Regulating Local Treasury . On the other hand, the appealed City Council asked the Chamber not to take into consideration such resolution of our highest court of guarantees "because it annuls a series of precepts related to the formula for calculating the Tax on the Increase in the Value of "Urban Nature Lands that in no way affect the object of this appeal ."