A tax technical report (vergi tekniği raporu) that is not served with the assessment notice does not, on its own, mean that every tax assessment will be annulled. What matters is that the report is brought into the case file, that the taxpayer can examine the report and its bases, respond to them, and that the reason for the act can be reviewed. While the time limit for bringing an action is protected, the request for access to the report and the objections on the merits should be prepared together. 1 2 3
In a tax dispute, it is often not enough for the taxpayer to know only the resulting amount. Without knowing which data the tax base (matrah) was determined from, which finding was made about the seller or the transaction, and which calculation method was used, an effective defence cannot be built. However, a petition that treats the absence of the report as the single and unchanging ground for annulment may leave the core dispute unanswered if the deficiency is remedied during the proceedings.
What does a tax technical report show?
A tax technical report may contain a joint statement of findings that could relate to several periods, tax types or taxpayers. Tax inspection reports may draw conclusions for a specific tax and period on the basis of these findings. The content of the report matters as much as its name: it should be examined whether the document explaining the reason for the assessment, the calculation or the factual basis of the imputation (isnad) was actually accessible. 3
A tax technical report, a tax inspection report and a tax crime report do not serve the same function. The tax crime report and the prosecutor's opinion (mütalaa) belong to the criminal process and are subject to separate assessments. The presence of one document in the file does not prove that the others were seen with all their annexes. The complete list of documents should be prepared by stating which report, with which date and number, is referred to. For more on this subject, see the article taxpayer rights in a tax inspection.
Is a report prepared about the taxpayer the same as a report on the seller?
The access and privacy issues of a report prepared about the taxpayer and a report prepared about a third party may differ. Irrelevant data about the third party may be protected; however, leaving the decisive findings on which the assessment rests incomprehensible makes the defence more difficult. The request should specify the relevant section and annexes, and explain which information is needed in order to respond to which claim. 1 3
If only the result sentence of a report on the seller is conveyed, the inspection date, the period of activity, the invoice list or the payment finding may remain missing. By contrast, where the inspection report sets out the supporting findings in detail, this may be taken into account in assessing access. Without seeing the file, no firm conclusion can be drawn that "no information was given" or that "full opportunity to defend existed".
How does the Council of State (Danıştay) assess the non-service of a report?
In the decision of the Tax Litigation Chambers Board of the Council of State (Danıştay Vergi Dava Daireleri Kurulu) dated February 19, 2020, numbered E.2020/9, K.2020/2, on resolving inconsistency (aykırılığın giderilmesi) between decisions of regional administrative courts, the failure to attach the report to the assessment notice was not accepted, in itself, as a formal defect affecting the merits. The majority explained that judicial review can be carried out once the report on which the assessment rests is placed in the case file and the claimant is given an opportunity to respond. The principle is that the decision is reached by discussing the content of the report, not by ignoring it. 3
The dissenting opinions (karşıoy), however, emphasised that the initial failure to provide the report prejudiced the options available before the action was filed and the defence. Therefore, the practical value of the objection is not merely to say that a document is missing. It should show when the deficiency was remedied, which decisive section is still unseen, and whether the opportunity to respond was actually provided. The decision should not be read as meaning that lack of access is unimportant in every case. 3
This case-law assessment is not a general rule that the time limit for an action may safely be awaited until the report is issued. The service and time-limit questions should be set out separately, and to avoid loss of rights, an application should be prepared within the period after the assessment notice is notified. If the report is submitted late, a properly made request may be filed for an additional explanation concerning the new information. This heading is also addressed separately in the article electronic service in tax matters.
How should the report and its annexes be requested?
The first request should identify the assessment notice and the tax technical report it refers to. If the date and number of the report are known, they should be stated; if not, the page or section where the reference appears should be indicated. Beyond the report, annexes on which the decision is based should be listed separately, such as calculation schedules, invoice breakdowns, and inspection and counter-inspection records. For more on this subject, see the article objection to the tax inspection minutes.
- Assessment notice number, tax type, period and service record.
- Date, number and relevant page of the report referred to.
- Annexes identified as missing, such as calculation schedules and invoice listings.
- Concrete finding that cannot be answered because of missing information.
- Requests for inspection, copies and the submission of explanations.
The date of the request and the record of receipt should be kept. The application should not be made on the assumption that it suspends the time limit for bringing an action. The effect of an administrative application on the time limit is examined separately, according to its nature and the applicable provisions, including Article 11 of the Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (İYUK). A mere request for documents and a request to annul the act should not be used as substitutes for each other. 2
What procedural steps can be requested from the court?
Under Article 20 of Law No. 2577, the court has the power and duty of ex officio investigation (re’sen araştırma). In the petition, or in the statement made within the time allowed, it may be requested that the report be obtained from the administration, that the annexes be completed and that the claimant be allowed to examine them. The request should not be limited to "all documents should be obtained"; it should show the effect of the document on the assessment and which point of dispute it would clarify. 2
Once the report has come to the case file, the upload or service record, and the legibility and completeness of the annexes should be checked. An annex in UYAP may appear blank or incomplete. The access problem should be reported with the specific page and file name. The deadline for explanation set by the court should not be missed; if necessary, a reasoned request for additional time should be made in due time.
What if the report is never submitted?
If the facts on which the act is based cannot be explained and, despite the court's request, the decisive report cannot be brought to the file, the question arises whether the reason for the act can be reviewed. This is a different matter from an annex being missing from the first service. The petition should show which claim of the administration remains unproven because of which missing document. It should also evaluate whether the other existing documents establish the same finding. 2 3
How is the defence completed if the report is submitted late?
If the new document contains an invoice, person or account difference not previously known, these should be listed separately. In the response, the date of access and the new information come first, followed by the counter-document and its effect on the outcome. In this way, the court understands why further examination is expected. A late report does not require the entire petition to be repeated or unrelated claims to be added.
Why should the objection on the merits be prepared together?
Although the absence of the report is important in procedural terms, the factual and legal bases of the act should also be discussed separately. A seller being inactive at a later date, a bank movement treated as gross receipts (hasılat), a cost calculation or a finding of a forged document each require a different defence. For known claims, counter-records are submitted; for findings not yet seen, the right of access and to respond is reserved.
The administration's strong defence may be that the report is adequately summarised in other documents, or that an opportunity to examine it was given during the proceedings. The answer to this is to show the missing decisive point, not to repeat the form. For example, knowing the result of a calculation does not mean that the list of transactions used in it can be checked. However, if a complete list was indeed provided, the defence must then address the content of that list.
How are the time limit, collection and post-decision steps monitored?
The general time limit for bringing an action in the tax court is thirty days; the starting point and special situations are determined separately. An action against the assessment notice and a dispute concerning a payment order or attachment should not be treated as subject to the same time limit. The fact that a request for the report has been made should not cause other steps to be overlooked. The competent court is determined by the action in question and Article 37 of Law No. 2577. 2
The effect of the assessment action on collection is evaluated under Article 27 of Law No. 2577, taking into account the part and exceptions that are the subject of the action. If the court annuls the act, the reasoning on which the annulment rests matters: annulment on the merits and a decision concerning a procedural defect that can be remedied may not have the same consequences. Whether a new act can be established, the binding effect of the decision, limitation and the relevant legislation are examined separately. 2
Conclusion
Access to the tax technical report is an important part of an effective defence. However, the action should not rest only on the sentence "the report was not served." The time limit should be protected; the report and its annexes should be requested; when access is obtained, every finding should be contested with counter-evidence; and when access is not obtained, the effect of this on the review of the reason for the act should be made concrete.
Frequently Asked Questions
Will the assessment be annulled outright because no report was given?
No. As explained in the section on how the Council of State (Danıştay) assesses the non-service of a report, access and the opportunity to respond are also taken into account in the proceedings. Return to the related explanation
Can I let the time limit for an action expire while waiting for the report?
This should not be done. A separate time-limit assessment should be made in the section on how the time limit, collection and post-decision steps are monitored. Return to the related explanation
Is only the result page of the report sufficient?
The decisive findings and calculations must be capable of being reviewed. The section on how the report and its annexes should be requested explains that missing annexes should be identified separately. Return to the related explanation
Can I respond to a report submitted during the action?
An opportunity to examine the report and to explain it may be requested in the proper way. The method described in the section on how the defence is completed when the report is submitted late can be applied. Return to the related explanation
Sources and legal bases
- Tax Procedure Law No. 213 (Vergi Usul Kanunu), Articles 5, 35, 108 and 140. Source text
- Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (İdari Yargılama Usulü Kanunu), Articles 7, 11, 16, 20, 21, 27, 28 and 37. Source text
- Tax Litigation Chambers Board of the Council of State (Danıştay Vergi Dava Daireleri Kurulu), February 19, 2020, E.2020/9, K.2020/2, decision on resolving inconsistency between decisions of regional administrative courts. Source text