Annulled a Tax Office settlement notified to an incorrect address

 

The High Court of Justice of the Region of Murcia (TSJ) has annulled a settlement of the Tax on Property Transfer and Documented Legal Acts (ITP and AJD), amounting to 20,483. 85 euros, considering that the notification was sent to an incorrect address. This decision is based on the violation of the taxpayer's right to defense, who never had real knowledge of the settlement due to errors made by the Administration.

Defective notification and lack of administrative diligence

The Administrative-Contentious Chamber criticized the performance of the Tax Administration, which resorted to edictal notification in the Official State Gazette (BOE) without correctly exhausting ordinary channels.

Although attempts were made to notify at several addresses, all failed due to containing erroneous data:

• An incorrect postal code was provided.

• Non-existent data of staircase and floor were included, despite it being a single-family home.

The court was clear: these attempts were invalid, as they were not real addresses or provided by the interested party herself.

The Tax Office did have the correct address

One of the most relevant aspects highlighted in the ruling is that the Territorial Tax Service of Cartagena already had the correct address of the taxpayer. This address was recorded in both the Municipal Register and in the Tax Agency's own administrative documentation, where successful prior notifications had even been made.

Faced with this circumstance, the TSJ concluded that the publication in the BOE was not justified as a "last resort," since the Administration had access to the correct address but chose not to use it.

Principle of defenselessness and right to defense

The direct consequence was a clear situation of defenselessness for the affected party, who could not exercise her right to appeal the settlement within the deadline due to being unaware of its existence. The judicial ruling emphasizes that the Administration must act with the utmost diligence and respect for the guarantees of citizens, especially when dealing with acts that may generate a significant financial obligation.

Consequences of the ruling

The High Court of Justice of Murcia annulled the resolution of the Regional Economic-Administrative Court (TEAR), which had rejected the claim for being submitted out of time. Furthermore, it ordered to revert the proceedings so that the TEAR accepts the claim and rules on the substance of the matter, that is, on the validity of the settlement itself.

The resolution can still be appealed before the Administrative-Contentious Chamber of the Supreme Court, opening the door to a possible broader pronouncement on procedural guarantees in tax procedures.

Practical relevance for taxpayers and companies

This case is a clear reminder that:

• The Administration cannot transfer to the taxpayer the management errors in notifications.

• Resorting to publication in the BOE should always be the last resort, reserved for when there is no other reasonable notification method available.

• Taxpayers in a similar situation have the right to appeal alleging defenselessness if they were not correctly notified at their actual address.

In conclusion, the ruling of the High Court of Justice of Murcia strengthens the protection of citizens against defective notifications and highlights the importance of the Administration acting with rigor and transparency in all its actions.

The annulment of this settlement highlights the primacy of the right to defense against administrative errors. An incorrect notification cannot be used to consolidate tax acts, especially when the Administration has the appropriate information to effectively communicate with the taxpayer.