Supreme Administrative Court
Judgment of 6 March 2014
Case No. 0108/14

In this Judgment, the Supreme Administrative Court states that the act by which the tax authorities decide to proceed with tax enforcement proceedings that were suspended is an administrative act which expresses a new understanding of the tax authorit ies regarding the requirements for the suspension of the enforcement proceedings, not being a specific and normal act of the conduction of the tax enforcement proceedings.

In this context, the Supreme Administrative Court states that, where such act does not have an urgent nature, there is no legal base to exclude the right to a preliminary hearing before its issuing.

Supreme Administrative Court
Judgment of 12 March 2014
Case No. 01916/13

In this Judgment the Supreme Administrative Court ruled on the situations whereby the judicial challenge of a self assessment act does not have to be preceded by an administrative complaint.

The Supreme Administrative Court states that, in addition to the cases provided for in the law – when the grounds of the challenge concern exclusively to the applicable law and the self assessment act was made in accordance with general guidelines issued by the tax authorities –, the judicial challenge of a self assessment act on grounds of the unconstitutionality of the rule under which the self assessment act was made does not have to be preceded by an administrative complaint either.

Administrative and Tax Arbitration Centre
Arbitration Ruling of 21 February 2014
Case No. 145/2013-T

In this Arbitration Ruling, the Arbitration Court ruled, among other subjects, on the transfer pricing regime, especially on the method used to determine the terms and conditions of the transactions that would normally be agreed, accepted or practiced between independent entities.

The Arbitration Court holds that the fact that the buyer with whom the seller is specially related with is the principal client of the later – with a purchasing volume almost 20 times higher than that of the independent clients –, as well as the circumstances that the former pays the products when they are delivered and shares the costs of their promotion, have potential to justify the establishment of more favorable prices.

Thus, the Arbitration Court concludes that, when an independent client with a similar relevance to the selling company does not exist, it is impossible to apply the comparable market price method, because it does not ensure the highest degree of comparability between the conditions of independent clients and that particular client with whom the seller is specially related with.