Best prices Special offers for members of the PWE book club The cheapest delivery
Mgr Agata Lipińska
ORCID: 0000-0002-7739-9537
Lecturer at Department of Financial Law, Faculty of Law and Administration at Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin. Active in the field of financial law with the following major areas: tax law and balance sheet law.
DOI: 10.33226/0137-5490.2021.10.7
JEL: K34, H25

in the corporate income tax

This contribution concerns the issue of the distinction of the category of revenues from capital gains on the basis of the Corporate Income Tax Act, which introduced significant changes to the calculation of income and tax loss. The amendment to the Corporate Income Tax Act separated revenues from capital gains from other revenues generated by the taxpayer. The definition of income from capital gains adopts a structure similar to that stated in the provisions of the Accounting Act. Therefore, tax and balance sheet law are similar in this case not only through the content relations constructed by the legislator, but also through the application of the reference provisions. Despite these connections, there are also content inconsistencies in the tax and balance sheet law, consisting in different definitions of terms adopted in various areas of law. The Corporate Income Tax Act explicitly refers to the provisions included in the Accounting Act. The subject of this article is to show the differences and legal effects of the legislative solutions adopted by the legislator. The separation of the revenue from capital gains in the Corporate Income Tax Act indicates that the norms of the balance sheet law may be recognized as forming a tax factual state.

Keywords: the content inconsistency; revenues from capital gains; the corporate income tax; balance sheet law
DOI: 10.33226/0137-5490.2021.8.8
JEL: K00, K34, K40

The article is a criticism of the Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) Judgment concerning the issue of ruling on a refusal to initiate proceedings, in proceedings commenced at the request of the party. Therefore, the scope of the party's rights in tax proceedings and the nature of the proceedings regarding the refund of value-added tax were analysed. On their basis, it was found that the refusal to initiate proceedings, issued according to Article 165a § 1 of the Tax Ordinance Act, applies only to proceedings inaugurated at the request of the party. Accordingly, it is not authorised to refuse to instigate the proceedings to credit the tax refund towards the liabilities indicated by the taxpayer.

Keywords: tax proceedings; refusal to initiate proceedings; tax refund

Lecturer at Department of Financial Law, Faculty of Law and Administration at Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin. Active in the field of financial law with the following major areas: tax law and balance sheet law.