Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_147097 AI generated

Tax evasion conviction: running of limitation periods for tax assessment and forced execution from facts vs. final judgment

Case Number ICCJ_147097
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Romania (Inalalta Curte de Casatie si Justitie) dismissed as inadmissible a request for a preliminary ruling filed by a lower court, thereby rejecting the lower court's challenge to the interpretation of tax procedure provisions. The dispute concerned whether, following a criminal conviction for tax evasion that includes an order to pay state debts, the statutes of limitations for establishing tax obligations and for forced execution run from the date of the underlying facts or from the date the criminal judgment becomes final. The admissibility challenge specifically targeted the interpretation of Article 91 and Article 131 of Government Ordinance No. 92/2003 (now codified in the Tax Procedure Code as Articles 110 and 215 of Law No. 207/2015). The decision was rendered based on the procedural requirements of Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the conditions for referring questions of law to the Supreme Court for unification of jurisprudence.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 110 din Legea nr. 207/2015, art. 215 din Legea nr. 207/2015, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Tax evasion conviction: running of limitation periods for tax assessment and forced execution from facts vs. final judgment: The dispute concerned whether, following a criminal conviction for tax evasion that includes an order to pay state debts, the statutes of limitations for establishing tax obligations and for forced execution run from the date of the underlying facts or from the date the criminal judgment becomes final. The admissibility challenge specifically targeted the interpretation of Article 91 and Article 131 of Government Ordinance No. 92/2003 (now codified in the Tax Procedure Code as Articles 110 and 215 of Law No. 207/2015). The decision was rendered based on the procedural requirements of Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the conditions for referring questions of law to the Supreme Court for unification of jurisprudence.

Keywords

AI generated
tax evasion statutes of limitations tax procedure code of criminal procedure tax assessments interpretation of a judgment

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 110 din Legea nr. 207/2015
92/2003 privind Codul de procedură fiscală, republicată, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare (art. 110 din Legea nr. 207/2015 privind Codul de procedură fiscală, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare) şi a dispoziţiilor art.
art. 215 din Legea nr. 207/2015
92/2003 (art. 215 din Legea nr.
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the decision.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 4/RC/2023
Tax evasion conviction terminated by statute of limitations: conflict between procedural interruption acts and material penal law favorability
Decizia nr. 227/A/2022
Tax evasion and embezzlement convictions: inadmissibility of cassation challenging statute of limitations calculation under applicable 1969 Penal Code
Decizia nr. 624/RC/2023
Statute of limitations versus constitutive elements of tax evasion and embezzlement in cassation review of criminal dismissal
Decizia nr. 1/2019
Fiscal limitation periods for compulsory execution: start date from penal conviction versus commission of tax evasion
Decizia nr. 1154/2025
Tax Evasion Recovery Action: Applicable Limitation Period Under Fiscal vs. Civil Delictual Law

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the decision.

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

ROMÂNIA

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept

Minuta deciziei nr. 1 Dosar nr. 2678/1/2018

Şedinţa din 14 ianuarie 2019

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul București - Secţia a V-a civilă, în dosarul nr. 13.382/4/2017, privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile vizând interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 91 din Ordonanţa Guvernului nr. 92/2003 privind Codul de procedură fiscală, republicată, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare (art. 110 din Legea nr. 207/2015 privind Codul de procedură fiscală, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare) şi a dispoziţiilor art. 131 din Ordonanţa Guvernului nr. 92/2003 (art. 215 din Legea nr. 207/2015), în sensul de a stabili dacă, în ipoteza în care s-a dispus o condamnare pentru evaziune fiscală şi obligarea condamnatului la plata sumelor datorate bugetului de stat (debit principal şi accesorii), prescripţia dreptului de a stabili obligaţiile fiscale şi prescripţia dreptului de a cere executarea silită curg de la data săvârşirii faptelor sau de la data rămânerii definitive a hotărârii de condamnare.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi, 14 ianuarie 2019.