RIVISTA DI DIRITTO TRIBUTARIO INTERNAZIONALE - Rdti.it

Sezione I - Dottrina
sidering the minimum requisite for punishability to be cognizability when
the lalter is not assured due to defects in the law considered as a whole, or
of individuai provision, the offence is not to be considered punishable (23).
Art. 11 thus assumes, employing a somewhat anomalous technique, a formula
usually set in the context of a dispensing circumstance: as things
stand, accordingly, the existence of "objective conditions of uncertainty"
will give the taxpayer both the right to non-applicate the penalties and the
right to present a request for clarification to the Financial Administration.
The implementation regulations for interpellation have specified that:
"objective conditions of uncertainty do not exist when the Financial Administration
has fully provided the solution for concrete cases corresponding
to the one described by the taxpayer, in a circular, resolution,
instruction or note, made knowable to the taxpayer through publication
on the Internai Revenue Department's "fiscal documentation" site.
With specific reference to interpellation, an objective condition of uncertainty
is not deemed to exist when the Administration has already stated
its position, independently of any contrasting views existing in legai
doctrine or jurisprudence in relation to provisions considered equivocaI
and obscure: in this case, the objective characterising the case in question,
i.e. the cognizability of the ministerial intepretation, has already
been obtained (24). : 26:
Administration and jurisprudential indications; jurisprudentiai preccdents pronounced
in favour of the taxpayer; authoritative doctrinai opinions".
(23) Art. 8, Legis. Decr. 546/92: "The tax disputes board declares :h;1t the non-penaI
penalties foreseen by the fiscai laws are not applicabie when the vioiation is justified
by objective conditions of uncertainty as to the scope and range of application
of the provisions to which it refers"; Art. 6, para 2, Legis. Decr: 472/97 :" the perpetrator
of the vioiation is not punishable \vhen it is due to objective conditions of uncertainty
as to the scope and range of application of the provisions to which they refer,
and also to vagueness of the requests for infonnation or the tax return and payment
fonns"; Art. 15, Legis. Decr. 74/2000: "Apart from the cases in which punishability
is excluded pursuant to Art. 47, paragraph three, of the penai code, \liolations of
fiscal regulations due to objective conditions of uncertainty as to their scope and range
of application do not give rise to punishable offences for the effects and purposes of
this decree"; Art. lO, paragraph 3, La".,' No. 212/200: "the penalties are in any case not
applied when the vioIation depends on objective conditions of uncertainty as to the
scope and range of application of the fiscal regulation or when it constitutes a mere
fonnal transgression without any tax debL Vìolations of exclusively fiscal relevance
cannot constitute causes of nullity for a contract.".
(24) On this point, see. P. Anello, La. rilevanza del concetto di obiettive condizioni
di incertezza dell'interpello, in Corr. trib., 29/2001. p. 2170, who remarks, in particular,
that: "a possible divergence between the ministerial position and that of jurisprudence
or lega! doctrine on a provision in any way definable as not clear or univoca!, although
RIVISTA DI DIRITTO TRIBUTARIO INTERNAZIONALE 312001