Informe jurídico sobre la Casación No. 18654-2022 LIMA
Fecha
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Resumen
El presente informe aborda la Casación No. 18654-2022 LIMA, centrando su
cuestionamiento en la validez constitucional del requisito previsto en el inciso c)
del artículo 21° del Reglamento de la Ley del Impuesto a la Renta, que exige
comunicar anticipadamente a la SUNAT la destrucción de los desmedros como
condición para su deducción en la determinación de dicho tributo.
Se argumenta que la deducción de gastos en la determinación de la renta neta
empresarial no es únicamente un elemento de la estructura del Impuesto a la
Renta, sino que también se vincula al principio de capacidad contributiva
Adicionalmente, conforme al principio de reserva de ley relativa, la determinación
de la base imponible, que incluye la deducción de gastos, constituye un elemento
esencial del tributo, por lo que su regulación debió estar contenida en la ley. En
consecuencia, al establecer el reglamento una exigencia adicional sin respaldo
legal expreso, se considera que se vulnera este principio constitucional.
El desarrollo del presente informe se realizó sobre la base del marco normativo
vigente, las sentencias emitidas por el Tribunal Constitucional y la Corte
Suprema, así como en doctrina especializada.
Como conclusión principal, se sostiene que el reparo a la deducción de los
gastos por desmedros por con cumplir con la comunicación previa a la SUNAT
del acto de destrucción, es contrario a los principios constitucionales.
This report analyzes Supreme Court Case No. 18654-2022 LIMA, focusing its examination on the constitutional validity of the requirement set forth in subsection (c) of Article 21 of the Regulations of the Income Tax Law, which mandates prior notification to SUNAT of the destruction of impaired inventory as a condition for its deductibility in the determination of the tax. It is argued that the deduction of expenses in determining net business income is not merely a component of the structural design of the Income Tax, but is also intrinsically linked to the principle of ability to pay. Furthermore, in accordance with the principle of relative legislative reserve, the determination of the tax base—which includes the deduction of expenses— constitutes an essential element of the tax and, therefore, its regulation should have been established by law. Consequently, by imposing an additional requirement through regulations without explicit legal authorization, it is considered that this constitutional principle has been violated. The development of this report is based on the applicable legal framework, the judgments issued by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, as well as specialized legal scholarship. As its principal conclusion, this report holds that the adjustment disallowing the deduction of expenses for impaired inventory due to the taxpayer’s failure to notify SUNAT in advance of the destruction is contrary to constitutional principles.
This report analyzes Supreme Court Case No. 18654-2022 LIMA, focusing its examination on the constitutional validity of the requirement set forth in subsection (c) of Article 21 of the Regulations of the Income Tax Law, which mandates prior notification to SUNAT of the destruction of impaired inventory as a condition for its deductibility in the determination of the tax. It is argued that the deduction of expenses in determining net business income is not merely a component of the structural design of the Income Tax, but is also intrinsically linked to the principle of ability to pay. Furthermore, in accordance with the principle of relative legislative reserve, the determination of the tax base—which includes the deduction of expenses— constitutes an essential element of the tax and, therefore, its regulation should have been established by law. Consequently, by imposing an additional requirement through regulations without explicit legal authorization, it is considered that this constitutional principle has been violated. The development of this report is based on the applicable legal framework, the judgments issued by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, as well as specialized legal scholarship. As its principal conclusion, this report holds that the adjustment disallowing the deduction of expenses for impaired inventory due to the taxpayer’s failure to notify SUNAT in advance of the destruction is contrary to constitutional principles.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Impuesto a la renta--Perú, Exención de impuestos--Perú, Derecho tributario--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Contribuciones--Perú
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
