Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.835
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Journal of Tax Law and Policy Scientia Business Law Review Scientium Law Review
Denny Irawan
Tax Officer
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 5 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 5 Documents
Search

 1 
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE ASPECT IN STRENGTHENING PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE AUDIT IN INDONESIAN TAXATION Denny Irawan
Journal of Tax Law and Policy Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Journal of Tax Law and Policy
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (250.744 KB) | DOI: 10.56282/jtlp.v1i2.78

Abstract

Challenges and problems of justice in handling tax crime cases must be handled by implementing restorative justice in examining preliminary evidence in the field of taxation. This has also been confirmed in the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2020-2024, which emphasizes that the improvement of the legal system must be realized through one crucial strategy, namely the application of Restorative Justice. Based on a study using a normative juridical method that can answer problem-identification and provide suggestions, this paper produces two conclusions. First, the principle of restorative justice is still very adequate to be adopted in the rules for examining preliminary evidence, as regulated in Number 18/PMK.03/2021, which has amended several provisions in PMK Number 239/PMK.03/2014. Secondly, restorative justice provisions in strengthening preliminary evidence examinations should be based on the following two essential keys. First, preventing tax avoidance and tax evasion is carried out through efforts to obtain consistent benefits rather than punishment. Second, preliminary evidence is examined if tax avoidance and tax evasion have occurred and if efforts are needed to recover state revenue losses from the sector through solutions and support for the state as a victim of active state participation and taxpayers. Thus, producing rules for examining preliminary evidence that reflect the fulfillment of material requirements, formal requirements, and restorative justice mechanisms.
ON ONE CONTINUED ACT IN TAX CRIME IN INDONESIA Denny Irawan
Scientia Business Law Review (SBLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientia Business Law Review
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (188.773 KB) | DOI: 10.56282/sblr.v1i2.120

Abstract

Delicts in criminal acts in the field of taxation comply with the lex specialis derogate legi generali principle of the Criminal Code (KUHP) and are included in complex criminal acts in their implementation. Given the violation of criminal acts and there are several offenses in criminal acts of taxation, it is necessary to consider the concept of renewal of a continuing action (one further action) in criminal acts in the field of taxation with the obligation of investigators and public prosecutors to produce case files and indictments that are accurate, clear, and right, which results in the amount or accumulation of imprisonment and fines against a suspect or taxpayer in a fair, legal and efficient manner. Based on the normative juridical method, this study produces two conclusions. First, one follow-up law that has not been regulated directly in criminal provisions in the field of taxation is still under general criminal offenses, namely Article 64 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Second, the concept (law) of follow-up action is needed in criminal acts in the field of taxation in Indonesia to be fair to accusations or taxpayers who commit violations and provide legal certainty and legal effectiveness to tax investigators in handling tax crimes which are complex and required to deal with cases carefully, clearly and completely
REFORMULATION OF THE PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE AUDIT TYPE IN TAXATION: WHEN LEGAL HERMENEUTICS MEETS THE RULE OF LAW (Part 1 of 2) Henry D. P. Sinaga; Denny Irawan
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (196.073 KB) | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.79

Abstract

The existence of facts in the form of two pretrial decisions decided that the two preliminary evidence examinations were invalid and declared null and void. It needs to address the shift in meaning that led to this type of preliminary evidence examination. Two conclusions can be drawn based on the legal hermeneutics method, which is framed within the framework of the rule of law. First, there has been a shift in the meaning of preliminary evidence examination contained in the KUP Law, namely the existence of a closed type of preliminary evidence audit in Government Number 74 of 2011 and PMK Number 239/PMK.03/2014. This meaning can be a problem in terms of tax enforcement that must be proportional to upholding legal certainty, public benefits, and justice, and in terms of administering government administration which must be based on the principle of legality, the focus of protection of human rights, and the general direction of good governance. Second, the reformulation of preliminary evidence audit must be carried out by eliminating the prevailing type of closed preliminary evidence audit. As the understanding and explanatory side of legal hermeneutics has defined preliminary evidence examination as a series of activities carried out by preliminary evidence auditors against individuals and or entities related to circumstances, actions, and/or evidence that can provide indications of a strong suspicion that a crime in the taxation sector is being or has occurred and can cause losses to state revenue. It is necessary to delete the legal text related to the type of closed preliminary evidence audit in a secure manner.
REFORMULATION OF THE PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE AUDIT TYPE IN TAXATION: : WHEN LEGAL HERMENEUTICS MEETS THE RULE OF LAW (PART 2 OF 2) Denny Irawan; Henry DP Sinaga
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 3 (2022): Scientium Law Review
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i3.92

Abstract

Adanya fakta berupa dua putusan praperadilan yang memutuskan dua pemeriksaan bukti permulaan tidak sah dan dinyatakan batal, menunjukkan perlunya menangani pergeseran makna yang menyebabkan terdapatnya jenis pemeriksaan bukti permulaan. Berdasarkan metode legal hermeneutics yang dibingkai dalam kerangka the rule of law, dihasilkan dua kesimpulan. Pertama, telah terjadi pergeseran makna pemeriksaan bukti permulaan yang terdapat dalam UU KUP, yakni terdapatnya jenis pemeriksaan bukti permulaan secara tertutup dalam Pemerintah Nomor 74 Tahun 2011dan PMK Nomor 239/PMK.03/2014. Pemaknaan tersebut dapat menjadi permasalahan dalam hal tax enforcement harus proporsional dalam menegakkan kepastian hukum, kemanfaatanpublik, dan keadilan, dan dalam hal penyelenggaraan administrasi pemerintahan yang harus berdasarkan asas legalitas, asas perlindungan terhadap hak asasi manusia, dan asas umum pemerintahan yang baik. Kedua, reformulasi pemeriksaan bukti permulaan harus dilakukan dengan menghapus jenis pemeriksaan bukti permulaan secara tertutup, sebagaimana sisi pemahaman dan sisi eksplanasi dari legal hermeneutics telah memaknai pemeriksaan bukti permulaan sebagai serangkaian kegiatan yang dilakukan oleh pemeriksa bukti permulaan terhadap orang pribadi dan atau badan terkait suatu keadaan, perbuatan, dan/atau bukti yang dapat memberikan petunjuk adanya dugaan kuat bahwa sedang atau telah terjadi suatu tindak pidana di bidang perpajakandan dapat menimbulkan kerugian pada pendapatan negara, perlu dilakukan penghapusan teks hukum terkait jenis pemeriksaan bukti permulaan secara tertutup.
SAMPLING AUDIT OF THE TAX AUDIT IN INDONESIA: A LEGAL CERTAINTY PERSPECTIVE Denny Irawan
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.148

Abstract

The problems of low Audit Coverage Ratio (ACR) and Additional Underpaid Tax Assessment Letters (SKPKBT), tax audit period, and tax determination expiration considerations indicate that this phenomenon is necessary to produce an ideal (legal) concept related to audit sampling in tax audits for Indonesia. Based on the normative juridical method, it was concluded that there is a need for legal certainty related to audit sampling based on the constitutional order in connection with the fulfillment of tax law requirements as a lex specialist derogat lex generalist. The absence of audit sampling provisions in tax audits is based on the absence of statutory regulations binding on taxpayers, tax authorities, and certain third parties. In fact, there is always uncertainty in tax audits, there is a need for sufficient legal evidence in tax audits, there is a need to consider efficiency and economic benefits in carrying out tax audits, there is a need to use the means of professional judgment of tax examiners, and a reasonable basis is needed to conclude the characteristics of a population in a tax audit.
Co-Authors Henry D. P. Sinaga Henry DP Sinaga