Post by account_disabled on Mar 11, 2024 23:32:17 GMT -6
The exercise of rights granted by law, normative commands that prevent, hinder or make exceptions to what is established in the governing legislation are illegitimate, to the point of eliminating the main purpose of the law which should promote its implementation before society. Even when exercising a delegated competence, the elected public agent needs to respect the material limits of the legislation, so that, by issuing rules through normative instruction, ordinance and/or notice, such rules are restricted to what is defined in the regulated law, under penalty of exceed the limits of their jurisdiction.
In this case, despite the apparently legitimate objective, the federal entity did not pay attention to what was defined in the Regency Law, preventing the maximum effectiveness of the granted right, as the diction of the articles of the designated RFB Belgium Phone Number Data Ordinance nº 208/2022 as well as the provision of the Transaction Notices by Adhesion of the Federal Revenue, imposed limits and restrictions on the provisions of articles 2, 10-A and 11 of Law No. 13,988/2020, regarding the opportunity to pay debts subject to administrative litigation under special conditions.
In this sense, while Law No. 13,988/2020 aims to encourage the regularization of debtor taxpayers, providing more favorable conditions for compliance, in particular providing tax justice by enabling the closure of debates within the administration without further harm to litigants, the aforementioned RFB Ordinance No. 208/2022 and the RFB Adhesion Transaction Notices No. 01 and 02 of the Federal Revenue, deny this right, contrary to the purpose of the law. It can be unequivocally concluded that the impediments established in the provisions of RFB Ordinance No. 208/2022 and RFB Adhesion Transaction Notices No. 01 and 02, not only disrespected the principle of legality, but also ended up drawing limits and restrictions completely outside regulatory normative purpose.
In this case, despite the apparently legitimate objective, the federal entity did not pay attention to what was defined in the Regency Law, preventing the maximum effectiveness of the granted right, as the diction of the articles of the designated RFB Belgium Phone Number Data Ordinance nº 208/2022 as well as the provision of the Transaction Notices by Adhesion of the Federal Revenue, imposed limits and restrictions on the provisions of articles 2, 10-A and 11 of Law No. 13,988/2020, regarding the opportunity to pay debts subject to administrative litigation under special conditions.
In this sense, while Law No. 13,988/2020 aims to encourage the regularization of debtor taxpayers, providing more favorable conditions for compliance, in particular providing tax justice by enabling the closure of debates within the administration without further harm to litigants, the aforementioned RFB Ordinance No. 208/2022 and the RFB Adhesion Transaction Notices No. 01 and 02 of the Federal Revenue, deny this right, contrary to the purpose of the law. It can be unequivocally concluded that the impediments established in the provisions of RFB Ordinance No. 208/2022 and RFB Adhesion Transaction Notices No. 01 and 02, not only disrespected the principle of legality, but also ended up drawing limits and restrictions completely outside regulatory normative purpose.