Clarify your doubts by consulting your particular case
It should be clarified in advance, that inspection reports only reflect the proposed settlement which the inspectors consider adequate to regularize the tax situation of the taxpayer. Because, effectively, it is the Chief Inspector of the body or agency from which the inspection activities have been made, to dictate the corresponding administrative settlement act.
It is established that the act has only one settlement proposal, (either, prior or final, without any overdraft debt with adjustment, or pre-constituted evidence) it should be noted that the difference between conformity and nonconformity affects mainly acceptance or not, that the taxpayer provides to the proposal made by the Inspectorate.
Consequently, it also affects the subsequent processing of the act.
The signing of an accordance act produces the following effects:
a) The act is understood to have been notified to the taxpayer on the date of signing it.
b) The Chief Inspector has within one month from the date of the act, to issue and notify the taxpayer the administrative settlement act. If it isn’t done (which is the most frequent case), it is understood the settlement has produced according to the proposal made in the minutes.
That is, the proposal "becomes" the settlement.
c) The taxpayer is obliged to enter the amount of the settlement within the statutorily deadlines, counted from the following day on which the settlement is understood to have been produced.
For example, if the bill is signed on April 25, the entry must be made during the voluntary period up until 20th June.
d) It is automatically reduced by 30 percent the amount of penalties.
However, the Chief Inspector may recognise the existence of clerical errors in the certificate of conformity, and dictates to correct the corresponding administrative settlement before the one month deadline since signing it.
In such a case, if the correction means a reduction of debt, the new settlement nullifies the proposal of the act and the payment period starts from the date of notification of that assessment to the taxpayer.
In respect, if the correction means an increase in the debt settlement, the supplementary excess must be paid within the time that is counted from its notification (see 1.9.).
Meanwhile, the certificate of disagreement involves the initiation of the corresponding administrative file, which is resolved by the Chief Inspector, in view of the acts, the Supplemental Report should be issued by the acting inspectors of the taxpayer’s claims. Its handling is as follows:
a) Highlighted in the file manifest to the taxpayer for review.
The dossier must include the full report to the act of the nonconformity.
b) After having access to the file the taxpayer may make known their views within the next fifteen working days after the seventh day to date which the record has been extended (i.e. within 22 days).
This period to make submissions to the processing of the file manifest is conditioned, which is inexcusable compliance.
Thus, from the date of notification of the setting of the manifest (although such notification expires after the term of fifteen days, which is referred to in the previous paragraph), the taxpayer always has fifteen working days to make submissions.
a) The administrative act of resolution for the case should be dictated by the Chief Inspector within the following month of the deadline for making claims in view of the acts of the claims made by the taxpayer and other documents in the file. This act may be revoked or confirmed in whole or in part, the proposed settlement of the act and in any case opens the way for bringing the appropriate resources.
... desde que encontré a Serapeum, especialmente Josep Navarro, me he dado cuenta que realmente Josep es un gran profesional, no sólo te asesora sinó que con la jurisprudencia correspondiente, te explica en que situación te encuentras. Actualmente, me está llevando de una manera altamente profesional un tema que complicó mi asesor fiscal anterior ...