Summary
Full Decision
ARBITRAL AWARD
I Report
In these proceedings for arbitral pronouncement, the Claimant, A..., SA came before the tribunal seeking the annulment of the Municipal Tax on Onerous Transfers of Real Property (IMT) assessment [documented in the case file] in the amount of €130,117.78, arising from the acquisition, by purchase for the global price of €2,187,700.00, within the scope of an insolvency proceeding [No. .../13... TBVNO, of the ... Court of the Judicial Court of Ourém] of B... Unipessoal, Lda., of three urban properties [identified in the case file], located in..., located in the Joint Civil Parish of ... and ..., municipality of Alcobaça and of four autonomous housing units of a building located on Rua ..., Nos. ... to..., of the parish of..., municipality of Lisbon, properties and autonomous housing units that had been listed and attached to the aforementioned insolvent estate.
The claimant based its request for annulment of the IMT assessment on the alleged violation of the provisions of Article 270, No. 2, of the CIRE [Insolvency and Recovery Code], from which would result, in this case, the exemption from taxation ["(...)1 - The following transfers of real estate assets are exempt from municipal tax on onerous transfers of real property, integrated in any insolvency plan or payment plan (…)2 - Also exempt from municipal tax on onerous transfers of real property are acts of sale, exchange or assignment of the company or of its establishments integrated within the scope of an insolvency plan or payment plan or carried out within the scope of the liquidation of the insolvent estate (…)"].
These proceedings thus have, and more specifically, as their object the declaration of illegality and annulment of the IMT assessment, documented in the document No..., of 03/03/2016, in the amount of €130,117.78, the restitution of the amount unduly paid, plus the indemnity interest on that amount, whereby a prior Administrative Reclamation was filed with No. ...2016..., which was dismissed by order of the Chief of the Finance Department of Amadora, dated 31.10.2016.
After compliance with the respective regulatory procedures, this Arbitral Tribunal was constituted on 6 February 2017, as confirmed by communication from the President of the Deontological Council of CAAD.
By order of 14-2-2017, the Director-General of the Tax and Customs Authority (AT) was notified by the Tribunal to respond in accordance with Article 17 of the RJAT [Tax Arbitration Regulation].
Following this order, the AT, in a submission presented on 20-3-2017, "(…) brought to the attention of the case file that the aforementioned order [of the Chief of the Finance Department of Amadora ...] was revoked, with all legal consequences, by the Chief of that Finance Department, by order issued on 15.3.2017, in accordance with the revision of the interpretation of No. 2 of Article 270 of the CIRE set out in Circular No. 4/2017, of 10 February, expressed in Section III of the annex to Circular No. 10/2015, according to which the application of the tax benefits provided for in No. 2 of Article 270 of the CIRE does not depend on the property sold, exchanged or assigned encompassing the totality of the insolvent company or one of its establishments. Thus, acts of sale, exchange or assignment, individually, of real property of the company or of its establishments are exempt from IMT, provided that they are integrated within the scope of insolvency plans, payment plans or recovery plans or carried out within the scope of the liquidation of the insolvent estate. On these grounds, it is requested that Your Excellency declare the proceedings terminated due to supervening futility of the dispute, in accordance with Article 277, letter (e), of the CPC [Code of Civil Procedure], subsidiarily applicable in accordance with the provisions of Article 29 of the RJAT. (…)".
An order was then issued on 18.5-2017, directing the notification of both parties that the proceedings would be declared terminated in case nothing to the contrary was requested.
On 20-5-2017, the Claimant, following this order, came before the tribunal alleging, in essence, that, "(…)in light of the revocation of the order that is the subject matter of the present proceedings and with the consequent duty of restitution of the amount of tax unduly paid, plus legal interest from the date of payment until its effective return, the now Claimant has no objection to the proceedings being declared terminated due to supervening futility of the dispute, in accordance with the provisions of Article 277(e) of the CPC applicable ex vi Article 29 of the RJAT (…)" with costs to be borne by the AT.
Preliminary Assessment of the Case
This Tribunal is competent.
The proceedings are proper and the parties are legitimate and possess legal and procedural personality and capacity.
There are no exceptions or nullities.
It is therefore necessary to assess and decide on the termination of the proceedings.
II Grounds
According to Lebre de Freitas, "supervening impossibility or futility of the dispute occurs when, by a fact occurring during the pendency of the proceedings, the claimant's claim cannot be maintained, by virtue of the disappearance of the subjects or the object of the proceedings, or finds satisfaction outside the scheme of the claim sought. In either case, the claim ceases to be of interest – both due to impossibility of achieving the intended result; here, because it has already been achieved by other means" – See "Code of Civil Procedure Annotated", vol. III, p. 633. In the same understanding, Lopes do Rego, Comments, p. 611 and Remédio Marques, Course on Common Executory Process, p. 381.
Subsuming:
Clearly, having the proceedings as their object the annulment, on grounds of illegality, of the IMT assessment, following and as a consequence of the dismissal of the administrative reclamation, the declared and accepted revocation of this act of dismissal by the AT necessarily entails the annulment of the assessment with all legal consequences.
In other words: with the tax act at issue destroyed by administrative revocation during the pendency of the cause, the proceedings are left without an object and the continuation of the proceedings is not only futile but even impossible, due to lack of object of the dispute.
III Decision
In light of the foregoing and having considered the positions of both parties and the provisions of Articles 277(e) of the CPC applicable ex vi Article 29 of the RJAT, the proceedings are hereby declared terminated due to supervening impossibility of the dispute arising from the voluntary elimination from the legal order, as set out above, of the assessment act that is the subject matter of the proceedings, and the appropriate filing of the case is hereby ordered.
Costs
The costs are to be borne by the AT inasmuch as it gave rise to the termination of the proceedings (See Articles 527 and 536(3) and (4) of the CPC, applicable ex vi Article 29 of the RJAT), with the arbitration fee fixed at €3,060.00, in accordance with Table I of the Regulation of Costs in Tax Arbitration Proceedings and Articles 12, No. 2, and 22, No. 4, both of the RJAT, and Article 4, No. 4, of the aforementioned Regulation.
Value of the Dispute
The value of the dispute is fixed at €130,117.78, in accordance with Article 97-A, No. 1, (a), of the Code of Tax Procedure and Process, applicable by virtue of subsections (a) and (b) of No. 1 of Article 29 of the RJAT and No. 2 of Article 3 of the Regulation of Costs in Tax Arbitration Proceedings.
Let it be notified.
Lisbon, 22 May 2017
The Arbitral Tribunal,
José Poças Falcão
(Presiding Arbitrator)
Pedro Soares Martinez
(Adjunct Arbitrator)
Ricardo Rodrigues Pereira
(Adjunct Arbitrator)
Frequently Asked Questions
Automatically Created