| Summary: | 碩士 === 東吳大學 === 會計學系 === 104 === Article 52 of Petition Act stipulates that members of the Petition Reviewing Commission shall comprise senior staff of the organization and selected impartial social representatives, scholars and experts, among whom the impartial social representatives, scholars and experts shall account for at least one half of the members. After the implementation of the Petition Act, governments of various levels select scholars and experts with good social image as members of Petition Reviewing Commission, which is conducive to establishing the impartial image of the Commission, enhancing the quality of petition decisions and further promoting the public’s trust in the petition decisions. According to the resolutions of the 9th and 22nd plenary meeting in the 6th session of the 7th Finance Committee of the Legislative Yuan in November 1999, the external members of the Commission of the Ministry of Finance, such as lawyers, accountants and financial experts shall account for at least two thirds of the total number of member. The Commission of the Ministry of Finance was reorganized in 2011. The revocation ratio before and after the reorganization is the first question this article wishes to discuss.
The 2nd section of this study analyzed and examined the decision by the Petition Reviewing Commission of the Ministry of Finance, in which the original punishment (review decision) was revoked, and the appropriate decision was made by the original disciplinary authority. Based on the revoked cases after petition from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2012, causes and reasons of revocation were analyzed. In case of petition decisions where the punishment shall be reconsidered by the original disciplinary authority, it means the petition reception authority considers the original administrative punishment to be flawed, either illegal or inappropriate. Illegal ones mean the administrative punishment does not comply with the laws and regulations. Inappropriate ones refer to the punishment that does not agree with the objective purpose, although it does not violate the law; or the punishment was on unclear facts or responsibilities of the original disciplinary authority. The aforesaid punishment decision shall be investigated again by the original disciplinary authority before rendering a new decision. Therefore, the cases related to different tax items, such as individual income tax, business income tax, estate and gift tax, value-added and non-value-added business tax and Tax Levy Act, are analyzed separately to find the reasons of punishment revocation after the review decision (administrative punishment) by the National Tax Administration
|
|---|
