In The Matter Of The Application For Revocation Part Of Ust. Article. In Act No. 260/2002 Coll.

Original Language Title: ve věci návrhu na zrušení části ust. čl. V zákona č. 260/2002 Sb.

Read the untranslated law here: https://www.global-regulation.com/law/czech-republic/513341/ve-vci-nvrhu-na-zruen-sti-ust.-l.-v-zkona-.-260-2002-sb.html

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Get a Day Pass for only USD$19.99.
236/2011 Sb.



FIND



The Constitutional Court



On behalf of the Republic of



The Constitutional Court under the SP. zn. PL. ÚS 9/06 decided on 12 April. July 2011, in

plenary in the composition of Stanislav Duchoň, Franz Package, Vlasta Formankova,

Turgut Güttler, Ivana Janů, Vladimir Crust, Dagmar Lastovecká, Jiří

Mucha, Jan Musil, Jiří Nykodým, Pavel Rychetský, Miloslav Výborný,

Elisabeth Wagner and Michael April about the design of the regional court in Brno,

for who is chairwoman of the Senate 31 Ca JUDr. Jaroslav Skoumalová, on

repeal of provisions of article. In the second sentence of section 1 of Act No. 260/2002 Coll.

amending Act No 191/1999 Coll., on measures concerning

import, export and re-export of goods infringing some rights

intellectual property and amending certain other acts, as amended by

Act No. 121/2000 Coll., Act No. 586/1992 Coll., on income tax, in the

as amended, Act No. 593/1992 Coll., on reserves for

the findings of the corporate tax base, in wording of later regulations, and act

No 569/1991 Coll., on the plot of the Czech Republic, as amended by

amended, with the participation of the Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament

the Republic and the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic as parties to proceedings



as follows:



The provisions of article. In the second sentence of section 1 of Act No. 260/2002 Coll., which

amended Act No. 191/1999 Coll., on measures relating to the import, export and

the re-export of goods infringing certain intellectual property rights

and amending certain other acts, as amended by Act No. 121/2000 Coll.

Act No. 586/1992 Coll., on income taxes, as amended,

Act No. 593/1992 Coll., on reserves for the findings of the corporate tax base,

in the wording of later regulations, and Act No. 569/1991 Coll., on Plots

Fund of the Czech Republic, as amended, shall be abolished on the date of

the publication of this finding in the statute book.



Justification



(I).



Recap of the proposal



1. On 29. February 2008 the Constitutional Court was instituted by the regional court

in Brno (hereinafter referred to as the "District Court") for annulment of the provisions of the second sentence of point

1 article. In Act No. 260/2002 Coll., amending Act No. 191/1999 Coll., on the

measures concerning the import, export and re-export of goods

infringing certain intellectual property rights and amendments

other laws, as amended by Act No. 121/2000 Coll., Act No. 586/1992 Coll.

on income tax, as subsequently amended, Act No. 593/1992 Coll.,

on reserves for the findings of the corporate tax base, as amended

regulations, and Act No. 569/1991 Coll., on the plot of the Czech Republic,

in the wording of later regulations. A regional court in its proposal states that

hearing an action, which the applicant seeks annulment of the decision

Tax Directorate in Brno from day 5. 12.2005 No. 3181/05/ANALYSIS

110-0107, as well as his previous decision to the tax office Brno

(II) of 9 June 2005. 12.2005 No. 178259/04289913/9780 which was the plaintiff

levied income tax for the tax period of the year 2002 in the amount of $87 028.

Action by the contested decision the defendant and administrative authority of first instance

against the tax, the applicants on the basis of the application article. (IV) and article. In point 1 of the law

No 260/2002 Coll., which a change was made to Act No. 586/1992 Coll., on the

income taxes. In proceedings before the regional court while the defendant

administrative authority delivered its opinion (see no. l. 45 and 46 judicial record sp.

Zn. 31 Ca 27/2006), in which he stated that, as the authority of the Executive was not

in administrative proceedings shall be entitled to assess the consistency of regulation of the lower legal force

with the law or compliance of the law with the constitutional order, although it was in

the administrative procedure the applicant requested. The defendant as an administrative authority is not

open for submission to the Constitutional Court to abolish the law or the

its individual provisions and the law did not permit the defendant, as well

as neither the tax administrators in the first degree, a different procedure when assessing the article. In

the second sentence of section 1 of Act No. 260/2002 Coll., for interpretation of

the provision is ambiguous.



2. Also the regional court in the present case before it came to the conclusion that the

the contested provisions of article. In point 1, the second sentence is based right

the retroactive effect, that there has been a fundamental disadvantage of individuals

trading in securities, and a simple system using double-

accounting. He pointed out the finding of 12 October. 3.2002, SP. zn. Pl. ÚS

33/01 (see below), in a similar case in which the Constitutional Court has come to the

the conclusion on the neústavnosti application of retroactive tax legislation. Therefore,

the regional court of actions interrupted in accordance with § 48 para. 1 (b). and)

Code of civil procedure of administrative and handed according to art. 95 para. 2 of the Constitution of the United

Republic (hereinafter referred to as "the Constitution") proposal to assess the constitutional conformity

the provisions of article. In the second sentence of section 1 of Act No. 260/2002 Coll.



II.



Representation of the parties



3. the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom expressed its

Chairman Ing. Miloslav Vlček, who was limited to a mere description of the course

discussion of the draft Act No. 260/2002 Coll., noted that the proposal

(The Chamber of Deputies. III. vol. period. Print no. 1267) was submitted to the Government

solely as a change of law no 191/1999 Coll. in the 2. reading on 23. 4.

2002 the contested provision was proposed as an amendment to the Knesset

Antonin Macháček. Bill was in the texts of amendments

approved 2. 5.2002 162 from 168 votes of present members. The nature of the

the proposed amendment, which is the issue of imports, exports and reverse

export of goods infringing certain intellectual property rights concerns,

the President of the Chamber of Deputies.



4. the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic expressed its Chairman MUDr.

Přemysl Sobotka. He stated that the draft of the Bill was referred to the

The Senate on 7 December. 5.2002. After discussion in the committees adopted the Senate on 18.

meeting of 24 April 2001. 5. the 2002 resolution, which expressed the will to the draft of this

the law does not deal. 51 voted for this proposal from 54 present Senators

and senátorek. Chairman of the Board, these data demonstrate appropriate documentation

from the acts of the institutions of the Senate.



III.



Formal conditions of discussing the proposal and the constitutionality of the legislative

procedure



5. The Constitutional Court has come to the conclusion that after the formal proposal is in

accordance with the requirements of article. 95 para. 2 of the Constitution and § 64 para. 3 of Act No.

182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, as amended, (hereinafter referred to as

"the law on the Constitutional Court"). In proceedings for annulment of the law is

the duties of the Constitutional Court must first examine whether the provision in question was

issued by the constitutionally prescribed manner (section 68, paragraph 2, of the law on the constitutional

of the Court). The proposal refers to the regional court of law, which the Court

immediately used in the solution of the case, i.e.. When deciding on administrative

the lawsuit led by before the regional court under SP. zn. 31 Ca 27/2006, and

on the assessment of the constitutionality of the proposal for the contested provisions of law No.

260/2002 Coll., the next steps depend of the applicant in this proceeding. The proposal was

authorized by the applicant, therefore, filed.



6. The contested provisions of Act No. 260/2002 Coll. (also for the law as

the whole) ruled constitutionally prescribed number of members of the Chamber of Deputies,

While the Senate constitutionally prescribed by the number of its members, expressed the will of the

draft law does not deal (see sub 3 and 4). President of the Republic law

signed 11. 6. the 2002 law was declared in the collection of laws on 28. 6.

2002 under no. 260/2002. The contested provision has not been changed. The proposal is

Therefore, admissible. The Constitutional Court in this connection, considers it necessary to

noted that did not consider it necessary to deal with the question of the nature of the amendment

the design of a Deputy Anthony Macháček, who at 49. the meeting of the

the Chamber of Deputies on 23 December 2005. 4. the 2002 "loaded" amendment to amend the draft

the law amending the Act No 191/1999 Coll., on measures in relation to

the import, export and re-export of goods infringing some rights

intellectual property and amending certain other acts, as amended by

Act No. 121/2000 Coll. points out on its findings in cases

reviews of the so-called. přílepků, which concluded in its findings, SP. zn. PL.

TC 77/06 of 15 July. 2.2007 (N 30/44 SbNU 349; 37/2007 Sb.) ^ * and in particular

SP. zn. PL. ÚS 55/10 of 1 March. 3.2011 (promulgated under no. 80/2006),

section 105 when he took into account not only the fact that this aspect is not in

the design of the regional court, listed as its mounting point, but in the wake of

to the case-law also that the proposal covers only part of the Act No.

260/2002 Coll., in addition, adopted at the time already considerably remote.



7. Similarly, it was necessary to take into account the fact that the proposal of the regional court

Although it is directed against the novelizujícímu, rather than novelizovanému the law [to the fact

from the case law see, in particular, find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 5/96 of 8 July. 10.1996

(N 98/6 SbNU 203; 286/1996 Coll.), resolution SP. zn. PL. ÚS 24/2000

15.8. 2000 (27/19 SbNU 271) and find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 21/01 of 12 October.

2.2002 (N 14/25 SbNU 97; 95/2002 Coll.)]. The contested provisions of article. In point

1 the second sentence, however, is a provision on the entry into force of amended

the provisions of Act No. 586/1992 Coll., on income taxes, as amended by

amended, and Act No. 593/1992 Coll., on reserves for the detection

the tax base from income, as amended. Such


provisions has a separate meaning in contrast to the provisions of the Act on taxes

income [, in particular, the provisions of § 24 para. 2 (b). r) and w)] revised

Act No. 260/2002 Coll., which, however, are not the subject of judicial review

in this proceeding. There was also need to consider changes to the provisions

the income tax Act, as the regional court will assess the matter

According to the legal situation which is the subject of the proposal. The proposal is, therefore,

in this regard, tolerable.



8. Due to the fact that the present legal problems and also all the

the facts of the case were sufficiently obvious from the documentary

the supporting documents, the Constitutional Court according to § 44 para. 2 of the Act on the constitutional

the Court refrained from the oral proceedings, since it could not be expected

further clarification of the matter and the parties to the proceedings agree with dropping.



IV.



The assessment of the constitutionality of the provisions of the proposal



9. On this basis, after a review of the contested provisions of article. In point 1,

the second sentence of the Constitutional Court came to the conclusion that the proposal is reasonable. The contested

the provisions as a whole:



"Article. In



Transitional provisions



1. for the tax liability for the years 1993 to 2001 the existing legal

regulations. The provisions of article IV, shall apply for the first time for the tax period

2002. ".



As already mentioned above, only the second sentence is attacked by this

the provisions, as a result of the amendment to the application

income tax for the tax year 2002, although according to the article. (IX)

Act No. 260/2002 Coll., this Act shall take effect up to 1. 9.2002. In

as a result of these provisions by the authorities of the financial intertemporálních

the administration required for the tax year 2002, apply in relation to the

the applicant in the proceedings before the regional court the following provisions

§ 24 para. 2 of the Act on income taxes, as amended by article. (IV) Law No.

260/2002 Coll., This provision (subject to review):



"10. In § 24 para. 2 the letter r) reads as follows:



"r) value of the securities when selling captured in the accounts in accordance

the special legislation ^ 20) on the date of its sale, with the exception of

referred to in subparagraphs (a) w)) ".



13. in § 24 para. 2 the letter w):



"w) the acquisition price of shares that is not valued in accordance with a special

^ law 20) at fair value, the acquisition price of the share on the

limited liability company or limited partnership, or

the team, and that's only to the amount of revenue from the sale of the shares or of the

share, ".".



10. The Constitutional Court is within the specific control of constitutionality of laws cannot

deal with your own subject of proceedings on administrative lawsuit, because it would

interfering with the independence of the judiciary performance general courts (here in

the administrative judiciary). His role is in the present case, to assess whether the

the application of the provisions of § 24 para. 2 (a). r) and w) Tax Act

income, as amended by Act No. 260/2002 Coll., has in terms of tax payer

the nature of the right claimed retroactive as from the beginning of the administrative

(vytýkacího) to control the applicant and how does it indeed, in this case

agree the defendant authority financial administration and regional court. whether you want

the nature of false-retroactivity, which under certain circumstances may be

also found the legislator institutional procedure.



11. The Constitutional Court States that the provisions in the amendment to the

income taxes (whether or not in relation to the Act No. 563/1991 Coll., on accounting, in the

the current version) in effect mean that in terms of section 24 of the Act on

income tax (in the version applicable to the tax year 2002) for

expenditure (costs) incurred to provide and maintain,

taxable income to determine your tax base (section 24 (1)) shall be deemed to

also the value of securities in a sale that was captured in the accounts in

accordance with the specific legislation (i.e. the Act on accounting) to

the date of sale, except as provided in subparagraphs (a) w) and of paragraph 2).

This means that the provisions of § 24 para. 2 (a). w), which is based on the

the acquisition price of the shares, and not from their real values, you must use the

for those who charge in the system of bookkeeping. This is because

under § 15 para. 6 of the Act on accounting, as amended, (at that time in

This provision is now cleared) is the entity that charges

in the system of bookkeeping shall not apply the provisions of § 7, 14, 27 and

28 of the Act on accounting. Because of section 27 of the Act on accounting, which

of the individual components of assets and liabilities at the time of the award pursuant to section 24 of the

paragraph. 2 (a). (b)) are valued at fair value, it meant that the

units using a simple accounting system (in this case

being the applicant in the case by the District Court under the SP. zn. 31 Ca

27/2006) cannot use this costing method. Decisive for them because

should be the acquisition share price rather than its real value. In the case of

the shares have been sold by the so-called. under price, the difference could not be for

tax year 2002, recognized as a tax loss in accordance with § 24 para. 1

the law on income tax, as in the sense of § 24 para. 2 (a). w)

This was an exception to the provisions of § 24 para. 2 (a). r), pursuant to which the

In contrast, the expenditure was also the value of securities "in the sale of the captured

in the accounts in accordance with the specific legislation on the date of its

the sale ", and a special regulation was necessary to understand the above

the provisions of the accounting Act. In this context it should be emphasised that the

It reflected not only to balance the management of the business units

using double-in the system of bookkeeping, but also to their

other payment obligations (e.g. in terms of payment of health and

social insurance).



12. The Constitutional Court considers it necessary to recall here that this programme

became effective in the course of 2002, namely from 1. 9. in 2002, and

should apply for the tax year 2002. Of crucial importance in terms of

the assessment of the constitutionality of the application of possible false-retroactivity (closer

Sub 14 to 16), however, has an additional circumstance. Substantial in terms of reviews

the constitutionality of the procedure of the legislature in this regard in relation to the status of payers

income tax using double-bookkeeping system is

the provisions of § 9 para. 4 of the Act on accounting, as amended, for the year

2002. It was true that the transition from the system of bookkeeping

in double-entry accounting system is required, if the accounting

the unit must meet the conditions laid down pursuant to paragraph 2 or 3 to

in the system of bookkeeping accounting, with the fulfilment of the conditions

set out under paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be assessed for the immediate

the previous accounting period. In doing so, "Transitions according

the previous sentences are possible only to the 1. day of the accounting period,

following the accounting period in which the entity has determined

above. ". In this context, § 23 para. 10 of the law on taxes

the income stated that when determining the tax base is based on the

the accounts maintained by a special legal regulation, IE. According to the

of the above, the provisions of § 9 of the accounting Act, which implies that the

during the year 2002, or retrofitted at a later time, it was not possible to calculate the basis

taxes in the system of double-entry accounting, and thus compensate for the cumulative

losses and gains from the sale of securities as before. In other words, in

tax year 2002, not the entity using the system

a simple accounting ability to respond to unexpected change in the law on

income taxes. If it is legally possible to make transitions between

simplified and full range of accounts only on the first day

of the accounting period, had such a taxpayer income tax option

customize their accounts in addition to the conditions set in the course of

in 2002. In addition, this amendment was hidden in the Act is completely different

subject to editing. According to § 1 (1). 1 of law no 191/1999 Coll., as amended by

Act No. 260/2002 Coll., the Act primarily regulates the conditions,

under which the Customs Office implements measures against persons who

owned, held, stored or sold the goods to which they are violated

intellectual property rights in the customs territory of the European communities,

as well as in the protection of the internal market.



13. in accordance with article 6(1). 1 (1). the Constitution is the duty of the State authorities in the

deciding on the legal position of the individual in accordance with the

the demand for the rule of law. These include the requirement to

State may require from the natural and legal persons whose behavior

the rules are established and announced in advance. Another procedure, if there are

This particularly serious reasons is a violation of the principle of legal certainty and the

protection of trust in the law, as is apparent from article. 1 (1). 1 of the Constitution. In a given

If no such reason is found to be not in the course of the legislative and

the process of, or have been formulated. The amending proposal containing the contested

the provision was "loaded" without it, he would have been somehow on a legally

relevantly justified. Such a procedure of the legislature at the same time represents

interference with the protection of property rights under art. 11 (1) 1 in conjunction with the

article. 11 (1) 5 the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms ("the Charter").


At the same time such action is discriminatory, since it lacks justification

the distinction between entities in relation to the system of a simple

accounting (could not appreciate the fair value of the shares and not so

apply any loss for tax purposes) and entities

relation in the system of double-entry bookkeeping. By the legislature at the same time

violated the requirement of equality of content and protection of property rights of all

owners without distinction according to art. 11 (1) at the same time he founded the inequality

in terms of the right to do business and engage in other economic activities

According to the article. 26 paragraph 2. 1 of the Charter, thereby violating article. 4 (4). 3 of the Charter.



14. with regard to the legal position of the taxpayer in the present case,

It should be noted that the Constitutional Court did not find in terms of factual

circumstances, the full analogy with the situation, which the judge in the case

the provisions of article retroaktivního. III (1) of Act No. 209/1997 Coll., which

are changing and supplementing Act No. 586/1992 Coll., on income taxes, as amended by

amended. In finding SP. zn. PL. ÚS 33/01, which is the regional

the Court relied on, it was the determination of the new duties, which the tax

the taxpayer could not assume at the beginning of the tax period. In the now

the present case, there was an intervention in the legal status (and thus to the

disadvantages) of the payer of income tax, while the taxpayer is this

intervention in the legal qualification of his legal proceedings could not subsequently

Customize with regard to that, so he had to make before the law

fixed accounting and tax period for 2002. In terms of the

However, assessment of the constitutional law on the matter relate just

the conclusions in the cited award SP. zn. PL. ÚS 33/01 of 12 October. 3.

2002 (N 28/25 SbNU 215, 221 and 225; 145/2002 Coll.) The Constitutional Court and the

which again confirmed in the establishment of rules for the procedure of the legislature when the

time conflicts of old and new legislation in the award SP. zn. PL.

TC 53/10 of 19 April 1996. 4.2011 (promulgated under no. 119/2010 Sb.), see sections

114 to 149. This legal opinion of the Constitutional Court had to apply in

the present case. The concept of tax policy is a matter for the State, which

Specifies what will be the tax burden on the taxpayer's particular taxation and how to

adjusts its obligations in connection with the verification of the correct assessment of the

the tax. Such search and respond to changing conditions to demonstrate the development of the

the legislation contained in sections 23 and 24 of the Act on income taxes in their

series of amendments from 1993 to 2002. Even in this extent

the legislative discretion is, however, the duty of the legislature to respect

the rules arising from the content of the principle of the rule of law (article 1, paragraph 1,

The Constitution), as well as from related constitutionally guaranteed basic

rights and freedoms in the region, i.e.. in particular, from article. 11 (1) 1 and 5, and article. 26

Of the Charter. Similarly, it should be pointed out the requirement of compliance with the rules of sound

the legislative process of which the infringement in the present case (here to load

the amendment without ties to the Government a draft law amending the

Act No. 191/1999 Coll., on measures relating to the import, export and

the re-export of goods infringing certain intellectual property rights

and amending some other acts) to unconstitutional modification opened the way.

Moreover, in this context, the Constitutional Court has pointed out that a question of trust

in the right lies not only in the fact that the legislature does not adopt laws,

that will change, the effects of legal action by their addressees, but also in the

trust that these recipients are from possible excesses of the legislature

protected constant case law of the Constitutional Court. This is especially true in

present case, where the contested provisions of Act No. 260/2002 Coll.

taken immediately after the Constitutional Court in a similar case such

How to qualify as unconstitutional.



15. Finally, the Constitutional Court of the petitioner's allegations about the dedicated

retroaktivitě the contested legislation. The contested adjustment was approved to

24.5. 2002, the validity of acquired 28. 6.2002 and from 1. 9.2002,

and should apply for the tax year 2002. In the case of

the adoption of the legislation during the tax period and its application on

the same tax year. In this case, however, the character of retroaktivního

of action is unique; with comparative reference to the case-law

The Federal Constitutional Court [e.g., decision of 19 March 2003. 12.1961

BVerfGE sv. 13, p. 261; of 14 July 1999. 5.1986, SP. zn. 2 BvL 2/83, BVerfGE

SV. 72, s. 200] such a procedure, the Constitutional Court without further does not rank as a

the retroactive effect right. While the right is the legal standards;

admissible only exceptionally, in the case of retroactive false is

considered the case law and the theory of mind, that its use (in particular in the area of

tax law) is permitted in principle, but only in the specific

on the contrary, being exceptional cases. Fake is in;

the field of tax legislation with respect to its mission, the permissible

then, if this is necessary to achieve the objective pursued by the law and if it can be

the Court concludes that, in the overall measurement "disappointed with" confidence in the law and

importance and urgency of the changes has been retained for reasons of legal boundaries

load capacity [cf. in detail find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 53/10 of 19 April 1996. 4.

2011 (promulgated under no 119/2007 Coll.), paragraphs 144-149].



16. now the facts, however, the Constitutional Court finds that such reasons

for exceptional conclusion about constitutional inadmissibility false-retroactivity are

Danes. Accessing a discriminatory nature of the contested conclusions on the

the modifications that would be sufficient in themselves to the conclusion about the need to cancel

the contested provision. In the present case, the legislature does not justify,

that there existed serious reasons stipulated that as a tax loss

the sale of shares at a loss, may apply for the specified conditions

only business units using double-entry accounting system. Only

to them should be subject to the rules of section 27 para. 2 of the accounting Act,

that determine what is required to understand the real value of the securities

(market value, valuation or expert,

If the market value is not available or does not sufficiently represents the

the fair value, or valuation provided for under special laws

the rules, if you cannot follow the rules determining the market value, or

based on expert opinion). On the contrary, the business units using

a simple accounting system should in future (but already for

tax year 2002) covered by Act No. 260/2002 Coll.

the amended rules § 24 para. 2 (a). w), which should be of

acquisition (the so called historical) stock price or the share purchase price of the share on the

limited liability company or limited partnership, or

the team, and that's only to the amount of revenue from the sale of the shares or of the

the share. For their case, the legislature retroactively ruled out that these accounting

the drive could take account of the loss-making sale of the securities. In the meantime,

could tax subjects using a simple accounting system

their legal proceedings (trading securities) to expect that

will be able to apply the loss from the sale of securities in the following

three years as expenditure within the meaning of § 23 para. 1 of the Tax Act

income. As a result of the contested provisions, however, each individual

loss on sale of shares has become a tax-neuznatelnou, as well as already

It was not possible in the sale of more shares in the tax period cumulatively

to compensate for the losses and gains in terms of section 24 of the Act on income taxes.

This conclusion is confirmed by the course of tax and court proceedings in the matter,

that gave rise to the decision of the Constitutional Court and implies

that is not possible, another, IE. constitutional interpretation of the

provisions. Therefore, even this procedure in the present case, the legislature must be

be considered as a breach of the legitimate expectation of the taxpayer in the right,

Since it is necessary to take into account the other aspects of the unconstitutionality of the contested

provisions (paragraphs 14 and 15). If the legislature imposes the tax payers and the

units, for example. the obligation to adhere to the rules they've chosen for

set out the accounting and the tax period on its origin (here the management

accounting in a certain system, submission of tax return based on

posting in the previously selected system, the inability to bring additional tax

return in the course of a tax audit, as it benefited from the law on

accounting, of the law on income tax and the law on the administration of taxes and

fees, in the version applicable in the year 2002, and of the implementing regulations thereto

issued), the legislature itself in terms of the rule of law, this

the rules for such period also respect and do not change it without

for serious reasons chargeable to tax payer, that accounting and

the tax year it with confidence in the law. The legislature must therefore

respect this peculiarity of the tax law in the light of the problems

should accounting and tax collection were different reviews of the nature

tax-relevant facts during the financial year and the tax

period. In doing so, it should be stressed that, nor can the different reviews

the legal grounds for the calculation of taxes and the tax burden


only on what accounting system leads the taxpayer of its

accounting.



17. therefore, the Constitutional Court and the regional court upheld the proposal under section 70

paragraph. 1 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the provisions of article. In paragraph 1(b). 1 second sentence

set aside. The decision was in accordance with the provisions of section 44 para. 2 of the law on

The Constitutional Court adopted with the consent of the participants without an oral hearing.



The President of the Constitutional Court:



JUDr. Rychetský in r.



* Note. Red: a collection of findings and resolutions of the Constitutional Court, Volume 44,

find no 30, p. 349, promulgated under Act No. 37/2007 Sb.

Related Laws