When The Last Legal Remedies are Hindered by the Tax Court’s Archival System

Imagine yourself as a business owner fighting for justice in a tax dispute that has drained your energy and finances for years.

After enduring a lengthy process in the Tax Court, you still feel that the ruling was unfair. Your only remaining hope is to file a Judicial Review (PK) with the Supreme Court.

However, instead of finding clarity, your application is returned due to incomplete documents, even though all paperwork had been verified by the Tax Court before submission.

So, where did things go wrong? Is this merely an administrative oversight, or is there a deeper issue within the Tax Court’s archival system?

Read: Judicial Review, the Last Legal Remedy for Tax Cases

Tax Judicial Review Procedure

To file a Judicial Review (PK), taxpayers must submit several essential documents, including the PK Memorandum, a copy of the Tax Court Decision, proof of payment court fee, and other legal documents if represented by an attorney. These documents are mandatory for the application to be processed further.

However, since 2024, many PK applications have been returned by the Supreme Court due to alleged incompleteness, even though they had already been verified and accepted by the Tax Court.

According to records from the Tax Court Registrar, as of September 25, 2024, the Supreme Court had returned 800 PK applications due to missing documents.

Some of the most commonly cited missing documents include, a copy of the company deed, a soft copy (RTF format) of the PK Memorandum and other supporting documents

Under Article 15 of Supreme Court Regulation No. 7 of 2018 (PERMA 7/2018), PK documents must be arranged into two bundles: Bundle A contains supporting documents from the disputing parties and Bundle B consists of documents to be sent to the Supreme Court. Each bundle must be properly bound or stitched together to facilitate verification.

In practice, many incomplete applications originate from bundles that should have already been verified by the Tax Court. If these documents were accepted in full at the Tax Court’s counter (Loket C), why are they later deemed incomplete at the Supreme Court level?

Does this indicate a gap in the administrative system that causes supposedly complete files to become incomplete during the submission process?

Read: Things You Need to Consider Before Filing an Appeal for Tax Case

The Urgency of Digital Archival System Reform

With the implementation of an electronic system under Supreme Court Registrar’s Letter No. 712/PAN/HK1.2.3/IV/2024, issues like these are expected to be minimized. Starting May 1, 2024, Judicial Review (PK) and Cassation case files must be submitted electronically, eliminating the need for printed documents to be sent to the Supreme Court.

This step offers new hope for those seeking justice in tax disputes. Digitalization should enable a faster, simpler, and more efficient process while also reducing the risk of document loss or administrative discrepancies.

However, without improvements in archival management and transparency in the verification process, even digital mechanisms may face similar challenges. Therefore, a comprehensive overhaul of document management at the Tax Court remains an urgent necessity to ensure taxpayers' access to justice is not hindered by preventable administrative errors.

Ultimately, tax administration reform must be a top priority. Taxpayers who have endured lengthy legal battles should not be further burdened by an inefficient bureaucracy. Public trust in the tax legal system can only be maintained if the process is truly transparent and accountable.

 

Disclaimer! This article is a personal opinion and does not reflect the policies of the institution where the author works.