Abstract:
The study of tax litigation concerning direct tax is one of about
important including the point of view practice with regard to the
diversity of laws on taxes and their complexity. It is very well a set of
conflicts resulting from the complex procedures and their diversity
following the multiplicity of taxes. Among the characteristics of this
type of litigation is that it must go through two stages:
The first step is the positioning administrative step in to end the
dispute between the taxpayer tax and tax administration, as it is a
decisive step and necessary where the lawmakers has attributed to the
taxpayer the right to defend its interests. When his objective is limited
to fix the mistakes of administration, it is also a way to correct its
errors before saying have recourse to justice.
In spite of benefits granted by the legislator on taxpayer of by the
right to file an administrative appeal of the wilayal Chief of taxes and
also the right to appeal to administrative boards. These so called
benefits have not raised great interest among taxpayers saw its
consultative point of view Under way of this situation, the tax
administration remains the only master on board, considering the
judicial control as a step guaranteeing protection of individual rights
of errors and potential overruns of the share of administrative services.
In the field of tax dispute, the judge that return full authority to decide
it said it can show look the judge that returning the full powers to rule
that says he can to show equity or compensation.
-The issue of specialization is not raised in the legal texts
Algerian tax to contrast the French Code, despite all these guarantees
in favor of the taxpayer, the position of administration remains
privileged compared to the latter during all stages of the trial.
