Treasury expands collegiate judgments in the Revenue offices
Source: Migalhas quentes
The Ministry of Finance issued ordinance 1,853/25, to change the rules of
judgment of the DRJs - Regional Trial Offices of the Federal Revenue.
The measure, signed by Minister Fernando Haddad, expands the hypotheses of
collegiate judgments and makes it mandatory to observe precedents in more
situations. The objective, according to the ministry, is to harmonize procedures and reinforce
legal certainty in administrative tax litigation.
The DRJs act as the first administrative instance in appeals against
tax assessments and work as a step prior to the Carf - Council
Administrative of Tax Appeals. Until the issuance of the new rule, collegiality
was restricted to cases above one thousand minimum wages (R$ 1.51 million). Now,
collegiate judgments are also applied to cases of
small value, up to 60 minimum wages (R$ 91,080), and of low complexity,
between 60 and one thousand minimum wages.
Ordinance 1,853/25 amends ordinance 20/23 and introduces a series of adjustments.
Among them, provides that:
· collegiate judgments will occur even in single instance
appellate proceedings, regardless of the value of the controversy;
· judges must observe the Carf precedents in monocratic decisions
and collegiate decisions;
· in case of resignation or termination of mandate, the judge remains in
exercise for up to 90 days until the appointment of a substitute;
· cases not framed in specific hypotheses must be
redistributed with priority;
· appeals against decisions of first instance that adopt as
basis plenary decisions of the STF, binding precedents of the Court or
precedents of the Carf will not be known, except when there is another
matter under analysis or if the taxpayer demonstrates the inapplicability of the
precedent or decision to the specific case.
The rule also authorizes the presentation of recorded oral arguments and
digital memorials both in challenges and manifestations of non-conformity
in voluntary appeals. In addition, it reinforces that monocratic decisions
must contain a summary, report, legal grounds and order of subpoena.
Another changed point was the treatment given to cases of small value
judged collegiately: even if considered by a panel, they will follow the simplified rite
provided for their category, with registration in judgment.
Finally, the ordinance details deadlines and rules for diligences and expert opinions,
redistribution of cases, declaration of unsuccessful votes and correction of
material inaccuracies in judgments or decisions.
The new discipline entered into force on the date of its publication at the DOU, on September 4.