The Tax-Insurance Procedure Code (TIPC) provides the administrative appeal before the director of “Appeal and tax-insurance practice” department of National Revenue Agency (NRA) as a compulsory instance before the court appeal. The individual administrative acts created by the revenue authorities, like inspection acts, acts for offset operations or refunds, acts for VAT registration or deregistration, expert opinions for application of Double Tax Treaties etc., are subjects to appeal through administrative channel before NRA first and court control after.
The minimum content of a complaint against an administrative act is regulated by the law, namely:
1.The name (the name of the company or the name of its owner) of appellant, respectively representative, if the complaint is applied from the representative of the owner and its accommodation address;
2.The act or action which the document appeals against;
3.Evidence, which the appellant wants to be collected;
4.The subject of the complaint;
5.Signature of the sender.
The requirements of p.1, 2 and 5 are compulsory as content, but the lack of whichever of them is a reason for the inadmissibility of the complaint and a possibility of cancellation of the appealing procedure, so the document will stay without consideration. Except the name of the company which submits the document, the name of the person, on behalf of which the complaint is submitted, must also be shown. The same person must sign the complaint.
When the complaint is signed by an authorized person (proxy), it is obligatory to apply the letter of attorney which proves the authorization of the sender by a person with representative functions for the company for the actions related to the appealing procedure.
In case that the complaint does not contain a signature of the person, named in it or of missing sender’s name, or the letter of attorney, when it is applied by a representative or it does not describe which act the complaint is applied against, the administrative authority returns it to the sender to eliminate the irregularity in 7 days since date of receipt. If the sender does not eliminate the identified irregularity on the due date, the decision-making authority stops the proceeding of complaint like and leaves it without consideration.
The decision is subject to appeal before the Administrative city court with private complaint within 7 days since date of receipt. In case his deadline is missed, the act (against which the appeal is held) becomes effective and its further contestation is obstructed.
In case of removal of the irregularity by the sender, the administrative authority must review and pronounce a decision for the complaint. The active till 2007 Tax-Insurance Procedure Code (TIPC) contained compulsory requirement of describing the legal grounds and causes for the appeal but in the new TIPC this requirement is not mentioned anymore. Irrespectively whether concrete arguments are (or not) included in the complaint, the respective responsible authority is obliged to consider it and pronounce a decision. The presence of explicit objections about the illegality of the act which is appealed against shows only the seriousness of the sender but it is not a reason for not consideration of the appeal and not pronouncing a decision.