For your seven billion dollars. In the lengo we dent two times it exists. The risk is ninety percent. They are SMEs that generate eighty percent Give me twenty minutes of your time and I, in return, give you information on the most relevant issues in foreign trade, fiscal and customs with a human touch and let' s do a trak, a podcast of Magic and Mexican TVs hello how good afternoon welcome, let' s barter, as you know,
a TV event in Mexico. I' m so glad to be around and say hello to the Doctor, Doctor, thank you for being here, thank you. He welcomes the king, thanks to engineer Enrique, not that he was missing, but he gives us a hard time trying to get back safely and except this gives me great pleasure. And well, today, as you know, the intention is always to share experiences, share knowledge in these bartering. And today we are accompanied by Master Omar Lara, Master around here.
I don' t know if he' s already around to activate his camera. And well, today barter is useful for administrative resources. Here we are accompanied by the Master Sea Lara. Welcome, Master. How do you do? Good afternoon, Master, good afternoon, pleasure. Here he is with you again and good so I can give him the word. I'
d like to read your looks and allow me to. Master Omar Lara holds a degree in law from the Universidad Veracruzana, a specialist in constitutional and administrative matters from the Universidad Autónoma de Baja California OBC and a master' s degree in legal sciences from the UBC. It has various courses and degrees in tax law and foreign trade, as well as the preparation course for the Secretary of Agreements of the Procrearia de Justicia. He is a professor of administrative, fiscal
and customs law from two thousand eight in various institutions of higher education. He is an exhibitor and writer in administrative fiscal matters and has been a candidate lawyer since nineteen hundred and ninety- nine and from two thousand and four he has
specialized in the fiscal, administrative and customs areas. Currently this is from the firm Lara González, tax of the corporate consulting group legal network specialized in the areas of labor, social security, tax, administrative, foreign trade and customs. Master thank you so much for being here and bartering and well, well, welcome and, as you know, in the end we will ask questions
and answers. Sure, sure. Thank you again for the space. And yes, well, let' s try here to talk a little bit about topics that may already be good maybe not. I think the partner I see, because I think they know too much and I' m going to ask them later. Again we will touch on a topic there concerning the initiating resources. I remember that I had talked about that time there on a similar topic, about the development of the challenge of the administrative act in which I discussed
the resources. But not because it was not focused on this, but in general, how the administrative act is challenged. And now we have this subject to see some advantages. True, there is a challenge before the same authority, since, because there is not necessarily a generalized idea, but sometimes it comes to give that sometimes erroreal idea that it is not useful or that it
is a waste of time. Impugning through an administrative remedy may be in some cases, but not always, and we are going to focus on those favorable points that come to exist several times and that we must take advantage of then, because we will see about the authenticity of the administrative acts. She teaches nothing more to ask if she could already. I think I can already share it allows me to buy you. Thanks to seeing I think you can already.
True, yes, we see perfectly. Thank you very much. Okay. So, let us talk about this subject that I said, because on many occasions or not a few times, the idea is that to present an initiative before the Lucral, because it is time that it leaves is no more useful than the fact of generating more time for the duration of the challenge.
The number of decisions issued by the other administrative body, whether fiscal or administrative, which are not in favour of the individual when using the administrative remedy is very large, is not always true, but it is a higher percentage of decisions which are unfavourable. And so it discourages its use not because, because it seeks one and will find a contrary resolution. And basically, because what you' re going to have is like I said at first waste of time.
That is the general view and is often the case. I mean, I' m not gonna say that doesn' t happen either. However, there are situations that can be taken advantage of when the opportunity is given.
And here' s when what we' re going to talk about and we ' re going to try to land in this picture that you' re seeing about the means of challenge in general, is the picture that I was referring to that we' ve already practiced in another barter with no more memory and here what we see is, then, what are the two forms of production
of the administrative act. In other words, the case law criteria. They tell us that the administrative act or it occurs by a procedure, with the procedure in a procedure, its true result is the adneciative act, or if in the procedure. In those criteria they call it isolated manifestation. I prefer to call them without prior procedure. I like it better because it' s
very confusing in isolated manifestation. But this is how the administrative act occurs in our legal system, outside the doctrinal question, which, because there are many different situations to this. In our system a procedure is transmitted and the final result is the administrative act. Or it occurs without the need for this procedure.
For example, the resolution of a pama probably sensativo customs matter, would be the case of a nuitiative act resulting from a procedure, that of the home visit some inspection with its respective procedure and the isolated demonstration, since a transit fine, a fine of the SAT also between another type of a response some request. Then, in some cases due process will be given. They must notify. I have an opportunity to provide evidence, to make demonstrations,
there will be an assessment. It is a bit of evidence and the result, as it is that resolution, which is the administrative act, may have considerable time in the procedure. The administrative projects are really intended to be brief, but there is that tracito. And in the other case, because without the need of this, we did not say the ticket of violation of a federal transit fine, for apart from that there are formalisms that will be fulfilled.
For example, in the case of the cop who stops you, he asks you to identify yourself, he tells you why he' s addressing the offence you committed and handing you your infraction ticket. Thus, these two situations are those that arise regularly in the administrative sphere and whether it is fiscal or
administrative. This is how the act of administration takes place. So when I have the initiating act and also, by the way, before going on, although I will not deal much with that topic, because the auditiative silence can be given in certain procedures, also that they start ex officio or instances at
the request of the side of the individuals. Or whatever it is it has to solve and it does not solve, because it generates the administrative silence that we have heard, the negative ficta, positive affirmative that the law tells them, also positive ficta or sometimes the case of the confirmative ficta, but good
is the administrative silence. But limiting myself to express resolutions, in this case I have an infringement ticket, I have a certain tax credit, a resolution or a resolution, a home visit proper and I can challenge it here. This is where the resources, precisely within the means of defence, are located, because there are various bodies that will not necessarily link the Authority, such as clarifications, consultations, reconsiderations, but properly the challenge, as such is
given through the appeal. Subsequently, the contentious trial, as we can see here in the diagram, to continue later with I am not here adjusting my
screen. There' s the contentious trial, then the direct amparo. And to conclude, by exception, if there is an appeal for review before the Supreme Court of Justice, when it raises any question of the constitutionality of a rule, well, indirect amparo, because it is going to occur at various times when there is a violation of substantive rights protected constitutionally in various situations, from the procedure in the same resolutions, aptionally it can be given in the
course of the appeal until the same trial and after the trial is resolved, also then. This is the picture of general challenge that exists. And here the question is good and what is the usefulness of resources. And here he tells me that appeal is optional and if I have the situation that the author usually resolves in his favor, then what case does this party have to vote when I can directly to the contentious trial and continue the procedure, not if
it already takes quite a long time for the contentious trial lately. After the pandemic, we returned to past times. Before the pandemic there was a period where resolutions had been between three and five months. They were running the trials, at least the trials Let' s call it that simple. And now again we' ve been back in time for many years now, when it lasted more than a year, two years, and I think it' s
taking you too. That has to be regularized. But, the point is before this panorama of time, quite wide and then direct protection, which can be from six to eight months, because I am already seeing a panorama of more than two years. What case you have to add four, more, four more months. It is for that reason that it is said, because let us go directly to the contentious trial. At the end of the day, there we go. You will see the grievances, the concepts of challenge
that will give us nullity. But there are questions where the remedy is definitely necessary in order to have a proper challenge. Apart from the questions of utility that we are going to discuss, where these resources are necessary to provide evidence that does not contribute in a previous procedure, which would be this procedure before the administrative act, let us think of a home visit again focusing on fiscal
matters. I have all the proofs and evidence to prove that, since my tax base is lower than that determined by the authority through a presumptive decision and
I did not bring them to the home visit. Regularly, when we look at the records there, there are some texts where it says that, since it is already consenting to the facts and omissions or regularities that the author may have detected for not having provided elements, which is not accurate, since they have been recognized by the judiciary of the Federal Administrative Court, which there are two moments. One is precisely in the process of administrative procedures the home visit.
I return to the case of the visit and if I do not bring the elements there, in any case, it would be until the moment of the administrative appeal when I would have that last opportunity in a phase that we call administrative headquarters. The administrative seat must have the act issued from the time there is a procedure, the appeal and until the decision is made, i e all this is dealt with before the same administrative authority. Let' s
say the propepa, let' s say the sad say the customs. Then this administrative seat allows us to provide the elements that we have not exonerated in the previous proceedings, and this in the appeal for the authority to consider them according to what is, for example, in fiscal matters, in the Federation tax code, you have the opportunity to analyze all these elements to issue a proper resolution to the appeal, where you can leave without effect the act revoke
it modify it. The issue is that it resolves adequately with all the evidence without limitation, regardless of whether it has been provided in the proceedings. The same applies to the administrative appeal in the matter itself. I am referring to this with the Federal Administrative Procedure Act, which is the rule that is generally applied in addition to various administrative procedures. The same situation exists outside the tax
system. Then, when I make a contentious trial, I have to verify whether I previously provided all the evidence that I had to submit to the author for a favourable resolution. In my situation and, if it has not, yes, it is necessary to exhaust the remedy in order to offer those evidences.
And here we have to be very punctual to offer the evidence. If the authority considers that they are not carried out, my evidence is not accepted at the end, to which it is good, it is not the least, but the fact of offering them has already given me the opportunity to raise grievances before the Royal Administrative Court based on these evidences and to be accepted in the contentious trial, because if I do not offer any evidence, if I
do not do so until the contentious trial, having not offered it in the proceedings or in the appeal, my evidence will not be admitted in this jurisdictional instance, that is, in the contentious trial. There' s something we
call here. You can see in this part says open litis. This principle of open itis means that I do in a remedy because I have it here a resolution of some procedure and in a remedy I raise the illegality of this resolution and we will think that I found five to five serious points of illegality and of that I do assert one. Nothing more. This in other areas will lead to the fact that it will no longer be able to raise the
four missing points at a later stage. But in the case of a contentious trial, I am allowed, before the authority, to assert only one point of illegality and in the trial I can assert the remaining ones, including others that have arisen in the proceedings. This then allows me to strategically manage my resource, right. But what does not cover this possibility of open litis is
to provide novel evidence, i e open litis. It is limited to the arguments I have against the administrative act, and my arguments can be undermined. Well, it' s not here, you can see it' s limited. Rather, I mean, the arguments that I can make valet for the evidence that I have for do. If I have any grievances that depend on any evidence that I did not bring, simply by not being able to bring to the test, I cannot assert that grievance either. That is the question
of open litis. It allows me to vary new arguments, but as long as they are based on evidence that has been provided to the Authority in a timely manner. Well, those who rely on real evidence are also not necessarily all going to depend on a test. So it says here if the resource
is optional. If you can see here the text above the outline says if the appeal is optional, you can go to the court without exhausting it, but check if there was evidence to contribute to this I mean then here is, in fact, the jurisprudence of the open litis, where you can consult. There he speaks of this opportunity to provide elements in the procedure and as a final remedy. So that' s an important point, the need to leverage the resource. Now, as for what is itself an administrative remedy,
let us go to the case of the remedy of revocation. In the appeal of revocation, what we will find, is that the administrative act is notified, whether it comes from a procedure or without the need of this or, perhaps even the administrative silence that from the one who spoke to them. I have a 30- day deadline to file it by tax box. I file my appeal in the tax mailbox. So what we' re going to do here is to make sure it' s right. If it' s introvenient,
they can throw it away. This decision can also be challenged in the contentious trial and this could be taken into account here. In fact, the Authority argues for such situations. If I provided the evidence that I did not provide previously in the proceedings and dismissed the appeal, the Authority often says that
it cannot be studied, that it would have to return. Let' s think I win the trial because it was considered illegal to throw away and I point out that o. I ask the Tribunal to assume jurisdiction and to study
evidence and grievances against the original initiating act. In the trial, you object and say that this should not be because you have to return to the appeal again for her to analyze the evidence, for there have emerged some criteria that say that, in order to better protect the right of access to justice, the Tribunal can study the evidence here. What matters is that they have been offered in the letter, regardless of whether they have been given on mission on
appeal. And that' s good, because that time I was talking about sometimes extends a lot in defense. So that' s what' s going to happen at the source. If I continue, if it is appropriate, it is reviewed, that meets certain requirements that from here come other utilities that we will see later if I meet the requirements, since it admits and resource. If they won' t prevent me and if I don' t vent prevention, they may also have me for not submitting or discarding the remedy.
If they subsane my appeal, if evidence is released, they are released and, in any case, the decision is issued, in which they can also be dismissed. And this overlay means that some element was found there that made a source of recourse. For example, let' s go to the case I say that I was not notified of the tax credit and that I was not given any record, because the action that the authority has to take is
to admire the appeal and then the respective unit will provide the records. If a record arises where it says that I, if I received the administrative act, have to give me the opportunity to expand and in your case, they will analyze me and if they consider that what is the record of notification is valid, they will dismiss me. But that' s up to resolution. In brackets here with what I said about enlargement, note that it has been
a long time. I think it was two thousand fourteen, two thousand thirteen was eliminated. It was removed from a form that existed in the remedy of revocation, focusing on evocational remedies where we could ignore the administrative acts, and then the Authority had a procedure that was to notify me again the initiative actor, to let me know the records if they had notified me, because the records that at the time served to notify and I could formulate my extension against
the initiating act and the records currently there. The criterion that I have identified is the one that says that only when you refuse to know the administrative act is when they give you the opportunity to expand. But notice that the tsar, in fact, was from this year, a few months ago it started with this already gives you the opportunity to expand, even with the only constancy.
Nothing but doing something that' s bad good. In my case, it was my turn that I was notified, as the deadline for being given to extend the appeal. I was notified in person, that is, with personal news, when this really denatures the procedure of what is the tax mailbox resource. And well, there is an area of opportunity very, very, very good to challenge, because the online procedure is being denatured, which is the tax mailbox and because they are notifying by another way that should not be
This is happening. Let' s say it right now, because they just started doing it. I think they' re going to start warning later with sentences that they shouldn' t do it this way. Then they notify you personally and yes, they give you the option of providing the appropriate relief in the tax mailbox procedure. But, because this notification is irregular, because it can lead you to ignore precisely the same procedure, because there is that point
that is novel. It is emerging in this recently and there we can take advantage of something good. Then you can get over it outside of your enlargement. No. The point is that the resolution can favor you. No, it can favor you. It may favor you in part of what you requested in another. No. At the end of the day, if you consider it not, it is that, because it was wrongly resolved against you or that what it granted you or does not satisfy your pretensions, you can challenge
in the court with junciful administrative. So far, for it is the general procedure of what appeals are, a remedy of revocation that I took as an example also perhaps revision and the question is good, and what are the advantages. At the end of the day, not this. And here, then, before I reach that point, I show you in a general way the challenge that can be given, that is, the path that can be followed
by the challenge of an administrative act. And here I have the case of a visiting order that is notified, it is notified in all its phases until the beginning of the partial report. At the outset partial minutes final partial minutes, facts or omissions will be known twenty days to contribute elements. This is where we are often told, when they give us these twenty days, that if we do not provide an element, those facts, omissions and returns that
the authority has detected will be taken for granted. Which is not so and the final act. We have up to 20 days after the final act for final agreements and then the resolution. In this case, once I have the resolution, that' s where I tell you. If I did not provide the elements in this procedure, I have to exhaust the appeal because once I have the resolution of the visit, I can directly to the administrative contentious trial,
but it will happen with those evidence that does not contribute. That is where the remedy must be used to provide these elements and it can bring grievances to those elements of evidence so that it is not limited by this principle of open iris, which is limited precisely by the case of evidence. And because you can correctly challenge my good, I can correctly assert my challenge once I am in the contentious trial, well, here also its phases that are admitted
place you to the authority answer. If there are elements to expand, then you will be given the opportunity to expand The extension is also transferred so that the author answers enlargement and even there may be a second extension. And after this, there is a deadline for the completion of the substance. There are five- day infras to give you an opportunity to formulate formulated cats or not.
There' s an instructional closure. It is forty- five days to pass judgment, thirty days for the draft and the sentence is pronounced here, as there is already an opportunity to present, in case the judgment is contrary the direct amparo. Will we have fifteen days from which the notification takes effect three days after the effect of amplification by tax bulletin, by judicial volet? I' m sorry, jurisdictional volet will take effect after three days. The
next day begins at that fifteen- day deadline. And here, then, well, here is clarification, the clarification that can sometimes be used to suspend the period of amparo. By the way, we don' t have ten days. If I am notified of the sentence, I have ten days for clarification. If I really need time to do my present amparo well in the clarification, it will give them up to more than a month to come back. Reoperate the time limit for the amparo trial and I' ll leave you
there. There from you And well, then, the question is that I have direct protection and in all its phases is also admitted. There' s a deadline for pleadings. Turn to the magistrate. It has ninety days to form a project and sometimes it goes even longer. There is then a vote on the Engrose, which is, therefore, all that is the sitting, the resolution that was given in person at the sitting is transferred in writing with its corrections and everything else. That' s the Engrose, and there are
ten days to file appeals for review in the Supreme Court. By exception only yes and some challenge to a general rule or issues of constitutionality, truth, is invoked, and the Court either analysed it and was not favourable or did not analyse it. It is clear that the Court will consider whether or not my challenge is admissible, also in case it is relevant or not. This
would be the whole process of the challenge. Here' s what I say you can take up to more than two years and say and well, and for what adds more time with the resources and it' s enough time, two years to be imagined with sometimes you can' t say not always, but sometimes particular doesn' t have the chance to offer a guarantee or simply and simply it' s not possible to get the merchandise revolution from stock exchange can happen many things to be suspended know them also then. The fact is
that it can be seriously affected if the time is long enough. However, as I was saying to you outside that it represents more time, it is true that the administrative remedy, whether fiscal or administrative, actually comes to exist certain advantages that are these points that we are seeing here. First, because in any tax appeal it exhibits the possibility of filing the appeal in time and form referred to in article one hundred and forty- four and obtaining the suspension,
or that the administrative act is not carried out. So this situation, that you stop executing the initiating act without offering guarantee, because it is a tremendous advantage, because often there is no time limit for power or the time is urgent to be able to make a decision as to what guarantee can be offered or there is not at that time, maybe you do not get to have immediately there a policy, a bail police for the purposes of guaranteeing tax
interest, or there are no goods and you would have to look for another way to be able to guarantee and because the time and sometimes the self- save above the taxpayers or the private ones in general. And so, since appeals are suspended in tax matters, in administrative matters only it is foreseen that the administrative act will not be executed if it so requests in this particular case.
But when he talks about fines, he says that the tax interest must be guaranteed, I am of the idea that it may be that there is a very high guarantee criterion, so to speak. And there are courts that do not lend themselves to such situations, when it comes to protecting human rights in administrative and prosecutorial matters, we are very, very much punished with that. And so I think that, as it is a matter of tax interest in the case of mutuals, they are profit- making and are tax credits
made up of article four. From my point of view, the suspension of one hundred and forty- four would have to be extended. To the question of suspension. We can say well if I am challenging a fine of the prophet, because it would have to do with the fiscal at the administrative time, right, because already once you pass for your corp you can already become in the procedure of mystrarygo of execution. He' s got all the tax revenue. But I think that is precisely why there are a number of criteria.
There' s little. In fact, it is very rare to find any form of guarantee there, and everyone says that it is limited to the question of formal guarantee to the Federation' s tax code. And, well, the point here is that, from my very guarantee point of view, I would have to extend this suspension to what is a profit like a fine, because at the end of the day, it gives rise to a tax
credit. According to the fourth article, there is also a situation that occurs, for example, in the case of the doubling of the time limit to challenge that in the article it appears to be the twenty- three wrong answer in the number of the Fara law of the taxpayer' s facts. It says that if you are notified of a tax credit and are not properly indicated or a tax incentive act properly the time limit for challenging, there is a
doubling of the time limit. This they wanted to bring to the subject initiative and said that not only does it operate in tax matters. What I want to say to you in this way is that this reasoning can also be used in what I say to you, that I say well, is that the benefit if we want to extend the guarantees, the rights, the guarantees to human rights granted by the Constitution, because I believe that there should also be
a suspension in the case of exploitation. When I challenge directly from the resolution, let us say the prophet, the sad in matters of anti- labed laws that already see that it is all these questions of the mulhas that are applied by such situations, among many other administrative matters, that there is truth to me could also tell that and that only in tax matters and that if I had wanted to establish so, the legislator would have said so. But,
well, there' s the question expressly. This advantage is the remedy
of revocation, because one hundred and forty- four points it out. However, because it would be no more to argue and fight that point in administrative matters outside of that, since the guarantee is suspended, no, but in fiscal matters, I repeat, without giving guarantee also another advantage that we have in the appeals here, either fiscal or administrative, that is to say the appeal of revision of the law of President Eizativo or the remedy of revocation of
the physical code of the Federation. But remember that there are more resources up to Lynch' s Lincofolia, Infonavit' s and a number of resources that there are in various laws as well. The point, however, is to provide the evidence not previously presented to the author, says that the procedure is
what I was already mentioning. I did not provide evidence. It reaches our client in tax matters and comes to us with the resolution and it turns out that he has the means or the elements to prove that he was not a believer in that tax credit, to that sanction because he fulfilled his obligations simply only that he did not tell the authority. For x reason. Whatever it is, he didn' t let her know. So, in this case
I have the possibility to bring these elements before the authority. Ideally, the Authority will analyze them, value them, and die, reverse its resolution, which, therefore, is where, as a rule, it will not be given. But at least I' ve already provided the elements to assert my grievances in the contentious trial and I' m not going to be limited by this question of what the supply of evidence is and I' m going to be able to make use of the open litis too then it' s another
advantage I have. When I didn' t bring the elements in the previous procedure, well, I have the resource, we have to use it. Other than that it' s an advantage, you have to use it. Another aspect is to formulate new grievances in the federal initiating litigation and note that here the remedy of revocation, for example, in the case of an evocation appeal, I can tell you to assert an grievance. I have an administrative
act that has five illegal aspects and I only enforce one. And when the decision comes out, the decision to appeal for revocation, it is likely that the validity of the act that is legal will be recognized. Well, I ' m going to the contentious trial and I' m asserting the other four even during the procedure. I can find other magicians. Then I can make new grievances. It is the principle of open itis, usually when they are
not linked to tests. My arguments, because without any problem I can assert them. But if it depends on a test, you have to provide the proof and notice that here comes another point that, perhaps it does not mention expressly here, but we will think about those cases and come to be given.
It has come to light that I am asserting a formal grievance and the authority, because what it considers is that it is appropriate to revoke the act for purposes, proceeds from leaving them ineffectual so that the administrative act is replenished and then I get a decision in the administrative appeal that leaves no effect to replenish, since it is already without effect. What' s going on?
I can challenge. Yes, I can challenge and since the new situation of the actual act is that it is without effect, that resolution is suspended at least in tax matters, it is indicated by the tax code. I mean, as long as I challenge this, the new situation is going to stay and there is practically no longer any action. Then I can leave comfortably because I would already have to provide no guarantee, because the Act is revoked. Of course, it was intended to be reinstated, but it won' t
be done until a sentence is handed down. And if I have the elements to win, because I practically win an unsecured challenge, then that can happen. And it' s very useful now too. Another point is also to avoid the presentation of an inadequate defence means in the face of the imminent expiry of the deadline. And this is how it' s done. It' s not many times we' re gonna say it. It' s not
uncommon there, I think I' m going here. It is not uncommon for us to reach our client practically already to exceed the thirty- day deadline, either for the contentious appeal of revocation. And so it turns out that the analysis we' re going to do, because it' s not a simple leaf, sometimes it' s information boxes, it' s an extensive resolution. And if I have two days already practically, because I assume that it will be very difficult to present a good resource, a good challenge,
what I can do good arise several situations. The first one isn' t really very suitable, because I don' t like it. But in a case of urgency, it is worth asserting a grievance, even if it is unfounded in all the length of the word, to make a claim of wrong, to file appeals for revocation. At the end of the day, the case of the open litis operates, they can formulate new grievances, no more, it is necessary to take care that they do not depend on evidence.
Then I present my appeal with a grievance and, later on, the avour in the form of a challenge. But it can also happen that I need the time. I want to present the challenge well and well here' s a chance. It turns out that in appeals, usually when you don' t assert, at least in revocation, you don' t assert, grievances, they' re going to require you and they' re going to give you five days, that this practically becomes about twenty days to a month.
Why, because you present your remedies without grievances and within the period that they require of you, because practically fifteen days have passed and then the period in which they give you for that reason to vent prevention, for there are practically another ten days, so to speak, I say counting it on natural days, truth and because you already earned almost a month during which you could have already done well your resources, your grievances to challenge properly. It is then
valid to file the revocation appeal in the mailbox without making any grievances. They require me to do them and good and they are for these emergencies. When the client arrives and then practically swears up to the last day with a few hours to complete the deadline and present the resource by mailbox. It can even go without facts as well, but well, it will already depend on the
time or urgency you have. And well, here it is avoided to present an inadequate means of defense, because it will give you enough time to formulate properly and clearly, with the possibility to formulate later in the trial new adjuncts.
Another aspect that needs to be considered is that, apart from having this deadline at the beginning to file an appeal throughout the proceedings, because you keep studying the matter and because there comes a time in which you find aspects or new situations are being elucidated with the information that the Authority can give you and you detect new opportunities to challenge, and this is important because, apart from the analysis that you have more suitable of the matter, because you find new
areas opportunities that you can formulate as new concepts of challenge in or new grievances in the contentious trial and outside of the information that you obtain and a better analysis of the matter, it may happen that the Authority incurs illegalities that will later on give you Inclusive in the Community, it happened a lot with the
case of enlargement. I had to win several contentious trials because of this situation that eventually occurred We were challenging the ignorance of the initiating act and the authority only issued its resolution and said that it had been notified that the notification was legal and simply recognized the validity of the act. And, well, we were going to the contentious trial and we were glad that we had not been given the opportunity to expand and this was a matter of unity. Currently,
SAT is already giving time to expand. The problem is that, at least to me it was in the case of the foreign trade administrations, where they personally notified the deadline to extend. This should not be the case from the point of view. Recently, I think it was last month that came out
a criterion, a criterion of yes. It was the Final Court of Justice initiative where it talks about the promotions to make particular, but it says that if you present any promotion in the procedure of the education appeal in tax box, in a face- to- face way, that is, in the offices of the Authority. This is illegal. It should not be taken into account and, well, let us take the opposite approach, because if the Authority notifies you of the opportunity to expand, which is very important in a
personal way, because it is ingenially denaturing the procedure. Believe me, that ' s going to generate a lot of nullities later, because that just started salting me, but the point is that it' s already giving you an
opportunity to expand, because it was giving you adverse situations. Well, there can be a lot of situations that don' t give you the complete elements that the certification that makes of the acts that you are looking at to expand, that you will like to know is wrong and many more situations that can happen in the process of vocation appeal that will generate you, as I repeat,
new areas of opportunity to challenge. So, in the face of all these elements, because the appeal is already more attractive than you know that, in most cases, you will resolve against it, because I do have the opportunity to have more time to analyze the act. If the authority can generally incur situations that can give me new opportunities to challenge, because also if I have the time measured, it is also an opportunity that gives you the recourse
to use it. And, in general, except for the question of asus, this happens in the case of an appeal for revocation, The appeal for review, except for the appeal for review, which there is also a pop so limited to the question of ignorance of the act, but there is a chance that you can sample there. Then. These are some aspects, as I told you, that can be useful to us at the time of challenging
and making a decision. I consider that the panorama is opening up to use the remedy of revocation outside the true idea that, then, the authority will resolve against you and that it will resolve in your favor, that you do
generally. But good already with these aspects, because there is a reason, or there are several reasons, to be able to promote the remedy of revocation before going to the contentious trial to ours, for it would be for the moment of all the information that I wanted to give them, but that questions arise. We could exchange some points and gladly. Here we are to build a teacher. Thank you so much. Here are some questions you' re
asking us. For example, Francis is telling us good afternoon, Master Sea with what he is commenting, then you have to receive what they notify in person and so you can gain greater case. I believe that yes, that is to say, the fact that you receive and somehow I do not know within the procedure already implies a violation of that procedure because it is not giving you the right way the information, which in some way can have an impact
on your analysis. For example, I can say that I found out, I learned one day from the deadline they put in and out that I had to challenge the personal notification. The mere fact that the act is illegal is that an illegal act cannot have legal effects. That' s the point. Even if you' ve received the part I understand, the mature part of the notifications is that if you found out, most of the illegalities are validated. But here is a very different situation. Here it is to distort the
procedure and I think that goes beyond the fact of notification. This is a totally illegal act that cannot have any effect. So, if the authorship says that I do, I will tell you to know the elements to expand. I even put the paragraph there in the tax box so that your enlargement would go up there, because I think it does not affect him, no, because it would be to be seen. I think it can be received, even expanded, but I could bequeath that I didn' t have a chance
to form a proper defense. That' s what I' m focusing on there at that point of grievance. Excellent teacher hear and another question here is telling me. Juan Preciado says the guarantee how the judge determines it on the basis of determined credit, that is, if it is in vasar determined act, manages how the tax interest is guaranteed. Well, I think that' s the real question, how it' s going to be guaranteed, because
the tax interest is the amount of the tax credit. What authority seeks many times that there is no rule that says it must be three times more credit
than that there is. The tax interest is the amount of the credit and that is what must be guaranteed only that yes, in a pragmatic way, because the enforcer, in this case, who is the one who carries out the embargo, often or the authority that will decide on the guarantee, do try to make the good of a higher value than the tax interest for the question that when it is put to auction, if it comes to that instance, because the value to which it is going to be sold, because it
will be much less. True, then, if I have a guarantee, let' s think I owe a million pesos and I have a guarantee of a million pesos, because not necessarily the product of finishing that good is going to be of a million pesos maybe it will be less. That is why it is sought to be higher, but not because there is a provision to
say that. So, having the question that I think is how you determine the guarantee of trying tax, because according to the amount of the credit, if it was the question, yes, and I think that here too is usually the companies that give you a bond calculate on the credit or not the amount, that is, how much is the entrenchment. Yeah, yeah, that' s right and good. Here basically right now are the questions that I have in this case. I would like to see if some of the
bakers, in this case Enrique want to make a comment. Happiness pops out, but it' s not from my area and it really makes legal matters completely difficult for me. No more questions. It provided a question soon yes, I would have had us, when I was in the lab we carried many judgments and lost them to the question of form. You can' t say with respect to form and substance. There is sometimes a debate between lawyers
of formalists and lawyers of substance. There are those who say that, although there is a saying, the form is the substance, that is to say not to imply that outside the substance, the important thing is to be able to challenge in matters in a way that will give us nullity and they say that many times the form is the substance because it is won by questions of form. If there are matters of game background, they are lost, but in form they are won. However, I think it is important to know
both aspects, both in form and in substance. What can be, for example, on a home visit there are criteria that tell us or I have seen criteria there too. It is not very defined, but for example, I am cancelled a home visit decision by question of form and I have come to see analysis in judgments that say that the Authority can review the same period again because it was not substantive and did not make an analysis of the facts in itself, as it can make another visit on the same exercises, the
same contributions, well in the case of contributions. And well, there' s a point. I' ve seen other criteria that say you can' t, but it' s not really well defined. That' s what I want, I want to find something that defines me as not plainly.
The Authority is going to review you again when you cancel out of form, but I, for prevention, would prefer in a matter of home visit a little bit of substance, because yes, there is the possibility that at some point, given you, you will review again and a court will say no. Yes, I could because, at the end of the day, the background analysis wasn' t done. Then, therefore, without being able to
know both aspects, I say so becomes one more complete. It is not clear that there are matters where, for example, foreign trade, I cannot know, because very well the tax part of the ism VAT and perhaps I see a resolution of a pama and see a defect so that it will give me nullity. But we will have to see that defect outside, for example, if the resolution was issued outside the plan, because I think that was the authority there. Yes, but it is a matter of tariff classification.
I think that would be the case with the expert, because we cannot, of course, be experts in all matters. Then the bottom line always has to go hand in hand with a specialist. So do I. Thank you,
very interesting all of that because yes. We often want you to replace the procedure, because you don' t want to win me a trial by the way when I' m telling you exactly what it is, and that ' s often seen and hit us tremendously in the laboratory by the way I say yes, the oratory we are, we' re not lawyers, no, but we did have our procedure and our analysis, felicial expertise, very well elaborated, but all of a sudden they would say hey no, because
they lost it we said, but, well, the form and that is a very difficult thing for us. No, but it' s valid. As you say, it is valid and, in fact, sometimes the same nullity says and plain comes to occur in situations where, then, they are questions of form, but they clarify it well. The Authority may issue a
new resolution. There is nothing more than another matter of advantage here than, well, I do not like to depend on questions whether the Authority does not do something or is wrong, but it often happens that it seems like a rule, although it is not true that the Authority, when given two months,
four months, does not issue resolutions in time. Then you already have the right to issue the new resolution and there already flat, you close the possibility that you will reissue another resolution, even though it was formal and because they say if it is annulled, tells you plainly, but you have the opportunity to return issued another act, because they are discretionary powers, for example,
but you must do it within four months. And I mean that' s where I don' t like to depend on that, but sometimes it seems like that' s what' s going to happen, that the car doesn' t issue the resolution within the respective time frame and you practically know that you' re going to win. Exactly, they' re situations that have nothing. Thank you, Greetings, Greetings, Greetings. You want to
make some comment. There' s forgiveness. Thank you very much, daniela take congratulations a very good talk and very well conducted in a very didactic way, very consistent with your prints there in the logical sequences of a procedure with all its links this I would like to make a comment with you and listen to your opinion. This one. We know very well that there are four
ways that you have the authority for your powers of verification. The first is customs recognition, the second is transport verification, the third is the documentary review of gloss, the desk review and the fourth is the home visit. When the anam is separated from the SAT it is, my opinion, they leave to the NAM only one faculty, which is the one of customs recognition,
and the other three remain and remain in the service and tax administration. This one tells me that now in customs and this is really the opinion I want. With your experience and knowledge I hope you can tell me something. This one is doing a form of verification that calls it in internal transport, inside the customs tax precinct, not outside, as I know and you know it if we know a lot that the nature of the transport verification is already outside
the tax precinct, on roads, on streets, etcetera. Not with all the formalities involved in this situation, this form of verification, etc. What do you think of that figure being applied by customs for an internal transport verification so called. Yes, yes, the Doctor. Thank you, thank you for the question. Yes, it is interesting there that if the authority always
seeks the revequecos also to be able there to exercise its powers. I, when it was my turn to see the case of the verification they were already doing when immediately the transport or private and there they grabbed him and we went back. And well, now that they do it there in a good internal way. There' s an article that says you can control, you can carry out your powers within the tax precinct, but I always think it'
s the same logic. No, if I' ve already been through the automated infection system, yes, and I' ve been hit by saving, because I think the law shouldn' t be bugged and allow the exit and the fact that the individual is wanted to be chased considered to be a diversion of power, that is, the fact that it is somehow insidiously sought to subject the individual to verification powers. Yeah, I' ve seen the article.
I think it' s in the one hundred and forty- four, if I don' t remember there talking that they can exercise faculties in the enclosure, inside the enclosure permanently and I think that' s where they hang on, that they can exercise checking powers. At the end of the day, in the enclosure, but I consider it a detour of power, that is, outside the figures that may be there. I believe that there, yes, I would use that fraction fifth fifty- one of the hephe,
but I consider administrative that there are few cases that occur. For me there is a persecution, a kind of persecution, to the individual, an insidious question that yes, from my point of view, is a detour of power. Master Omar. I agree with you, I believe how they took away
that sato faculty, because all four of them had it. Logically, because they get out of the sleeve and coincide this deviated from totally illegal power, because if you' ve already gone through a customs survey and it touches you, it' s as if it' s a second recognition within the exact fiscal penalty itself, which was abolished because it didn' t work out and
only a number of improper issues were lent. Not if you say you touch free clearance or you get recognition from the authority protected there in some writing, because it does a review in transport and then it determines another situation. Thanks for drinking. Thank you very much, because I did have this doubt and wanted to see your coincidence with me. I thank you very much and congratulate
you. Thank you, Doctor, Greetings, thank you very much for giving homework and good to see you leave me here Héctor Castro walks, who is telling us that I don' t know why you can' t go up. I don' t know if you can' t, you can' t make any comments. But Master Hector Castro, here makes a comment of congratulations of another nothing like what already came out the comment. I appreciate it.
There, yes, well, what you say are many benefits, such as being a means of impugner that has shielded itself from electronic means and revocation, properly that without paper, which makes it a more economical means than the traditional, because it avoids the displacement of seats, in itself only some advantages, because that is also right. There are advantages also of the evocation resource, which is electronic, because of the question of the paper, although sometimes
well, it makes me suffer from that of the archives. Not because there are files that aren' t compressed, they don' t shrink, and there I' m battling them off so I can upload them, because it can' t be transformed. But yes, really yes, sometimes there are advantages that need to be exploited in electronic media. Sorry about that. In
conclusion, it is important that they take into consideration the following. As the automated system operates, you give yourself the chance to get customs clearance, go to free clearance. In the case of customs clearance, there are two types of recognition, but one is physical and the other is intrusive. When the recognition is made, it is not inturusive and there is some element where the customs dictator who is the third person who is outside is not part of the
Authority. So he finds you evidence that it doesn' t match what' s stated with what' s physically presented. That' s when it applies
to a transport goods verification order. And I am going to agree with Dr Marximo Carvajal that it is unnecessary, because within the tax area where it operates, the Authority can exercise all the powers to verify that they are met with each and every requirement so that the goods can pass and, if necessary, if they do not meet all the requirements, that the Authority can prevent that
from happening. It' s a matter of practice. The dictator informs the authority and authority mechanically turns an order for verification of transport goods as soon as the unit leaves the place of customs clearance before exiting the customs premises. And that' s where you apply the verification order that you undoubtedly reach questionable, but I' ll take this first part that I mentioned to you is and we don' t go to the definition of what customs is, as the
internal regulation of ANAM says. That is what 25 of the law says, it is the place where authority exercises powers, including all those relating to customs clearance. It is clear that if they find an indication that there is a presumption of compliance, they have to act accordingly and prevent the goods from coming out they have badly articulated it. They' ve done it wrong, but it' s the way they act. So I' m just staying right now with a question of an operational nature. That' s how it works
when it applies to the verification order. The second, the second case in which the verification has been bitten by the customs law in the one hundred and fifty- one, the seventh fraction where it tells you when you have doubts about the value in the customs, from the one way to the piggy, you can proceed the precautionary embargo, but the verification order must be issued by the central area and applied before the goods leave the terracito of the customs.
But, well, that' s a matter of practical order and I told myself one to what Enrique says, in the sense that authority, for many years for many years, lost many cases, for matters of form, for errors of operation and it was very frustrating that we had very solid cases and it was destroyed by that circumstance. And by the way, already to conclude that welcome, we were really worried about you. Thank you very much, Daniela, Don Doctor. Thank you very much, thank you for the comments.
We didn' t see it, teacher, but it' s a good thing you can connect and comment. And, well, thank you very much Master Amar and good from tels Magas team in Mexico we came to a barter that we want to give this virtual recognition for bartering the master Omar la rasoto, for making a traque in the virtual conversation with the topic utility in the administrative resources. The eighteenth day of October, two thousand and twenty- three. Thank you very much, Master, thank you for being here and
doing or truk no thank you. Thank you again for allowing me here the space and definitely here to listen to the idea of the experts taking away the panel. Thank you very much. Greetings to all of you. We' ve reached the end of today' s trout. Thank you so much for joining us. This was let' s do a barter over there. They are an event of TELC Magas and Mexico. If you like this talk, don' t forget to share each event with your contacts so that we continue
to spread knowledge and stay up to date. They find all our talks through our online education platform, entering www. TLC Magas in Mexico com MX in the section of Cussio, where you can see them again without things. If you are interested in a specific topic, send us a message through the social networks of telese magas in Mexico and we will look for an expert who can clarify your doubts. This was let' s do a truek.