@misc{Konstańczak_Magdalena_Prawo_2022,
 author={Konstańczak, Magdalena},
 copyright={Copyright by Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego sp. z o.o., Wrocław 2022},
 copyright={Copyright by CNS},
 address={Wrocław},
 howpublished={online},
 year={2022},
 publisher={Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego},
 language={pol},
 abstract={In the article, the author disputes the view of administrative courts which assume that art. 181 of the Tax Ordinance Act does not adopt the principle of directness of evidence and that there is no legal requirement that in tax proceedings conducted parallel to unfinished criminal or penal fiscal proceedings it is necessary to repeat the hearing of a witness who testified in those proceedings or the hearing of a defendant who gave explanations in those proceedings. The author takes the position that art. 181 of the Tax Ordinance Act clearly provides for the obligation to directly record such evidence at the stage of tax proceedings. The article indicates that an unjustified omission of such an action by an arbitrary decision of the tax authority undermines the right of a party to a fair tax trial. Therefore, a decision based on such evidence is issued in violation of the law and should be eliminated from legal proceedings as part of its judicial-administrative control.},
 title={Prawo strony do czynnego udziału w postępowaniu dowodowym w sprawach dotyczących oszustwa w VAT},
 type={text},
 keywords={right to active participation in the evidentiary process, principle of directness, taking of evidence, primary evidence, derived evidence, tax proceedings},
}