Analysis of tax administrative reconsideration case

(case)
Applicant: Pu Hua Industrial Co., Ltd.
Respondent: Pu Hua District Local Taxation Bureau
November 12, 1999. Pu Hua District Local Taxation Bureau received a letter letter masses report, report Pu Hua Industrial Co., Ltd. in the process of operation, not according to the law, invoices, national tax evasion. The applicant after receiving the report, decided to give the applicant shall impose a fine of 10000 yuan. If the applicant is not satisfied with, to Pu Hua District Local Taxation Bureau of the administrative organ at the next higher level in the local tax bureau to apply for administrative reconsideration, the reconsideration review, accord with the condition, City Local Taxation Bureau accepts the application for reconsideration.

Handle.

   Application said: they did not in violation of the provisions of the invoice, every income in accordance with the law make out an invoice, other people envious of their company's performance, it lies in an attempt to crush their company.
   The administrative reconsideration institutions accept the reconsideration, in accordance with the provisions of the "Regulations" administrative review thirty-eighth, fifth days after accepting the application for reconsideration to the service, the respondent immediately organized the investigation and collection of evidence, that the applicant is in violation of the provisions of the invoice, not only is the invoice receipt, but also datouxiaowei. The respondent widely for relevant personnel, collecting the testimony of witnesses, by substantial evidence to decide your punishment.
   The administrative reconsideration department after examination, the applicant is in violation of the law of invoice and irrefutable evidence, the punishment appropriate application of law, but because of the procedure in the process of investigation are illegal, make an administrative reconsideration institutions reconsideration decision: undo the respondent the decision of punishment and remaking administrative action.
(comment)

   Why the respondent has sufficient evidence to prove that the applicant has in violation of the law and facts, evidence that the applicant should according to the corresponding administrative punishment, administrative reconsideration department decided to undo can be decided by the applicant's punishment?
The crux of the problem lies in the violation of legal procedure in the whole tax inspection.
   According to the relevant laws and regulations, the administrative organ to make administrative punishment, must be investigated in order to make a decision on administrative penalty. "Administrative punishment law" thirtieth stipulates: "citizens, legal persons and other organizations, violations of the order of administration, it shall be given administrative penalty according to law, administrative organs must ascertain the facts. "" administrative punishment law "the thirty-first stipulation:" the administrative organ before making a decision on administrative penalty, shall inform the parties make the facts, reasons and basis for the administrative punishment decision, and notify the parties shall enjoy rights. "In addition," administrative punishment law "article thirty-sixth the administrative organ shall make an administrative penalty, must be comprehensive, objective and impartial investigation, collect relevant evidence. Visible, the administrative organ in the administrative punishment is made before, we must first investigate the facts, only in the case of irrefutable evidence, to make administrative punishment according to law. In this case, Pu Hua Industrial Co., Ltd. although there are in violation of the provisions of the invoice of the facts, but Pu Hua District Local Taxation Bureau only by a report from the masses, not comprehensive, objective, impartial investigation and collection of evidence, to the applicant for administrative punishment, a clear violation of the relevant provisions of the "administrative punishment law", to undo the punishment decision.
   "Administrative review law" twenty-third stipulates: "the respondent shall copy of a book or the copy of the application record within ten days from the date of receipt of the request, a written reply, and submit the original specific administrative behavior evidence, basis and other relevant materials. "The twenty-fourth stipulation:" in the process of administrative reconsideration, the respondent shall not to the applicant and other relevant organizations or individuals to collect evidence. "Be submit the original specific administrative acts of the evidence, basis and other relevant materials of the applicant, the applicant is because as responsible for the national management responsibilities of the executive authorities, in the rule of law, building the rule of law today, must be in strict accordance with the law to exercise their functions and powers, each of the specific administrative act shall be in accordance with the law of regulations, especially in the specific administrative acts relating to the rights and interests of citizens, legal persons or other organizations such as fines, there must be sufficient evidence, the corresponding legal basis, which is otherwise illegal administrative or not when the administration, it must be investigated. That is to say, the respondent that the executive must first have the evidence, and then in accordance with the law to make specific administrative acts, and not to the specific administrative act, and then collect evidence to prove that a specific administrative act to make their own legitimate. Therefore, the citizen, legal person or other organization in filing an administrative reconsideration and after receiving, if the applicant to collect evidence, have the right to refuse. In this case, Pu Hua District Local Taxation Bureau in Pu Hua Industrial Co., Ltd. filed the application for reconsideration to collect evidence, although the collected evidence of illegal behavior Pu Hua Industrial Co., Ltd., and can be based on the applicant to make the administrative penalty decision, but the collection for Pu Hua District IRD procedural illegal, which is a kind of no legal validity evidence, leading to processing Pu Hua District Local Taxation Bureau decided to be revoked.