The judgment of 7 judges of the Supreme Administrative Court of April 14, 2025 is another battle for tax limitation. How important this case is evidenced by the presence of participants in the proceedings before the Supreme Administrative Court. Representatives of the Ombudsman, spokesman for small and medium -sized enterprises, the National Chamber of Tax Advisors, the National Chamber of Legal Advisers and the Foundation of Taxpayer's Rights appeared in the court.
Basically, it was about the provisions that provide for the suspension of the limitation period if the tax criminal proceedings were initiated. The problem is that tax criminal proceedings should be initiated (which results in suspension of the limitation period) when the tax authority suspects that the taxpayer's acts are an offense or tax crime. What if such proceedings are discontinued because the taxpayer's actions were correct? It was in such a situation that the company whose tax authorities questioned the VAT settlement.
– However, the judgment of 7 judges of the Supreme Administrative Court is of meaningful beyond the resolution of a specific case. For the first time since 2018, the Court used a signaling order, directing to the Minister of Finance a clear message: The current practice of initiating fiscal criminal proceedings only to suspend the limitation period raises serious doubts. This confirms that the problem is systemic – comments Tomasz Rolewicz, chairman of the legal committee of the National Council of Tax Advisors.
Read also: Everyone will pay for Wólka Kosowska? The tax authorities takes on the clothing industry
Can tax authorities be allowed to abuse of law?
If it turns out that the authority initiated a carnoskarbal proceedings only to suspend the limitation period, then It can be an abuse of law. This was found by the Supreme Administrative Court in 2021, in the resolution (reference number I FPS 1/21). On Monday, April 14 this year. This was confirmed by the Supreme Administrative Court in the judgment of 7 judges. However, it was about something else in this matter – explaining whether the limitation period was ineffective if the initiated tax criminal proceedings were discontinued.
This was the case with the company that has been processing the tax office for 12 years. In 2013, she traded steel products. Steel trading was 12 years ago under the magnifying glass of the treasury due to large VAT extorts in the turnover, e.g. steel bars. The tax office issued a decision to the company regarding the VAT in a few months of 2013 on VAT for one of the months the dispute continues to this day. In the meantime, the tax should have been expired. Currently, this is the subject of the NSA control.
The company demanded the discontinuation of the VAT case because it believed that the obligation had expired. The authority refutes the allegations and indicates that the limitation period did not take place, because in the case criminal and tax proceedings were initiated, which suspended the limitation period.
Therefore, the dispute boiled down to whether the limitation period was effective. The company pointed out that the criminal and fiscal proceedings were initiated instrumentally, so it was not about punishing the perpetrators, but about the effect of suspension of the limitation period.
According to the company with instrumental initiation of carnoscarb proceedings, it is evidenced by, among others The fact that it was initiated 7 months before the expiry of the limitation period and the fact that the carnoskar's proceedings were legally discontinued because no signs of a prohibited act (offense or tax offense) were found.
When the case went to the Supreme Administrative Court, the judges first asked the resolution to decide whether the cancellation of the carnoskar's proceedings causes that the suspension of the limitation period was ineffective. In March 2025, the judges decided that they would not adopt a resolution, and the judgment in the case of the company would issue a 7-person composition of judges.
What results from the judgment of 7 judges of the Supreme Administrative Court regarding the limitation period
According to the NSA redemption of tax criminal proceedings (due to the lack of the features of a criminal act) It can be a premise (though not in every case) testifying to the ineffectiveness of suspension of the limitation period for the tax liability. As judge Roman Wiatrowski justified, However, this must be assessed in the light of the entire circumstances of the case. According to the NSA, there is no machine here. In other words, if the carnoscarb proceedings are discontinued, because the conducting authority does not find that there was no offense or tax offense, it can be examined whether the limitation period was effective.
Judge Roman Wiatrowski pointed out that the judgment of 7 judges of the Supreme Administrative Court is therefore consistent with the resolution of the Supreme Administrative Court of 2021 (in case I FPS 1/21). The court indicated in it, among others What premises can affect the fact that we are dealing with instrumental initiation of carnoskar.
– The discontinuation of criminal and tax proceedings is not automatically a premise for the statement that the limitation period has been suspended in an instrumental manner. This must be tested including other circumstances – said Judge Wiatrowski. Therefore, you need to examine all circumstances, including what was happening in the carnoscarb proceedings.
As for the company that was directly concerned with the judgment, the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the cassation complaint. The case will now return to the authority and he will again have to assess whether the initiation of the carnoskar's proceedings was instrumental and whether the limitation period has successfully suspended.
Read also: Car in the company. Do you want to count all VAT? Practical guide
Violations in the application of limitation – which results from the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court
The Supreme Administrative Court in the judgment of 7 judges also sent a signaling decision to the Minister of Finance.
“The Supreme Administrative Court decides to inform the Minister of Finance about significant violations in the application of article 70 couples. 6 point 1 of the Tax Code, consisting of instrumental initiation of criminal and tax proceedings, whose only motive due to the suspension of the limitation period provided for is to prevent the limitation period for the tax liability.
Such practice Application of article 70 parish 6 point 1 of the Tax Code is in conflict with art. 64 para. 1-3 in connection with art. 32 para. 1 and art. 2 of the Constitution. ” – The decision sounds.
Judge Jan Rudowski, chairman of the financial chamber and vice president of the Supreme Administrative Court, justifying the decision, pointed out that art. 70 parish 6 point 1 of the Tax Code It is “a source of a constant conflict between tax authorities and taxpayers.”
He also reminded that four resolutions of the Supreme Administrative Court have already been made in the limitation period (reference number II FPS 4/13, II FPS 3/17, I FPS 3/18 and I FPS 1/21). Not only that, the regulations regarding the limitation period along with subsequent amendments to clarify them are more and more problems.
Jan Rudowski reminded that the Ministry of Finance has repeatedly announced changes in regulations. Even a new tax ordinance has already been created (work was ordered by the Ministry of Finance and lasted five years – editor's note), but it was not adopted. It did not provide for the possibility of suspending the limitation period in connection with the initiation of a carnoskarbow proceedings. – The new Tax Code provided for a different approach to limitation of the dimension and limitation of tax collection – reminded judge Jan Rudowski.
He added that the Supreme Administrative Court in many sentences emphasized that “limitation cannot be an apparent institution, he must give taxpayers a sense of confidence.” In addition, the merger of art. 70 parish 6 point 1 of the Tax Code from art. 114a of the Tax Criminal Code leads to the fact that the tax liability never expires. The Ombudsman also paid attention to the Minister of Finance.
According to the Supreme Administrative Court, Regulations on limitation require comprehensive change.
– The National Council of Tax Advisors for years indicates the lack of transparent ratio legis of the provision of art. 70 parish 6 point 1 of the Tax Code and the risk of its instrumental use. Today's ruling is an important step towards restoring the balance between the fiscal interest of the state and the taxpayer's rights. We hope that it will be an impulse for urgent and real legislative changes – comments Tomasz Rolewicz.
Judgment of 7 judges of the Supreme Administrative Court of April 14, 2025, reference number I FSK 1078/24
