Abstract

Previous case law has demonstrated discrepancies in the understanding of the ground for reopening tax proceedings under Article 240 § 1 item 5 of the Tax Ordinance. These discrepancies centered on determining which entity - the tax authority or the party - should remain unaware of the existence of new circumstances or evidence existing on the date of issuance of the tax decision. These doubts formed the basis for the Supreme Administrative Court’s resolution of October 13, 2025, II FPS 3/25. Despite adopting a literal interpretation and determining that the attribute of novelty should be considered with respect to the tax authority, the limits of the admissibility of a party’s request for reopening the proceedings were nevertheless drawn. The purpose of this publication is to determine whether the interpretation adopted by the Supreme Administrative Court will contribute to strengthening the effective protection of individual rights vis-à-vis the state and whether it complies with the constitutional standards of the right to a fair procedure.