Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 27.11.1992 1599/5 AI generated

Court dismisses request to add stamp duty for delayed tax payment due to procedural error.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 27.11.1992 1599/5
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court dismissed the request to add stamp duty for a delayed tax payment following a procedural error. The lower court had initially set a lower tax amount, which was later corrected, but the court ruled that additional duty could not be imposed solely because of the delay. The decision rests on the principle that procedural delays do not automatically justify increased tax liability when the original assessment was merely incorrect.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

LeimaveroL 92 §; The court held that a procedural delay in tax payment does not justify the imposition of additional stamp duty when the original assessment was merely incorrect.

Keywords

AI generated
stamp duty procedural delay tax assessment administrative court LeimaveroL 92

Cited Legislation

AI generated
LeimaveroL 92 §
AI generated
admin_1993_hame-county__673
Stamp duty on invalidated seals in a debt collection case was allowed due to procedural error.
admin_1993_lapland-county__437
Stamp duty court order reversed because full payment with interest occurred before tax demand was filed.
admin_1990_northern-karelia-county__857
Stamp duty refund denied when transfer value differs from consideration due to statutory calculation rules.
admin_1988_kuopio-county__757
Administrative court dismisses appeal against notary's stamp request, ruling it not a reviewable decision.
admin_1992_turku-and-pori-county__379
Administrative court dismissed stamp duty claim where lower court exceeded authority by re-evaluating property value.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Käräjätuomari oli määrännyt kauppakirjan varustettavaksi

merkinnöin 15 750 markan leimaveron suorittamisesta lykätessään

lainhuutoasian käsittelyn 18.12.1989. Lykkäyksen

jälkeen lainhuutoa myöntäessään 6.2.1991 käräjätuomari

oli määrännyt saman kauppakirjan varustettavaksi merkinnöin

yhteensä 18 900 markan leimaveron suorittamisesta,

mistä oli todettu suoritetuksi 15 750 markkaa 18.12.1989.

Käräjätuomarin ei olisi tullut lainhuutoasiaa lykkäyksen

jälkeen määräajassa tehdyn hakemuksen johdosta käsitellessään

määrätä suoritettavaksi lisää leimaveroa, vaikka

hän olikin katsonut, että leimavero oli 18.12.1989 virheellisesti

määrätty liian pieneksi.

LeimaveroL 92 §