Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
3.186
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik HUKUM BISNIS Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis CENDEKIA : Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains Yustisia Tirtayasa: Jurnal Tugas Akhir Jurnal Hukum Sehasen Yuridika Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik (JIHHP) Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities Jurnal Penelitian Hukum Indonesia (J-PeHI) Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora Journal of Literature Review Jurnal Ilmiah Ar-Risalah: Media Ke-Islaman, Pendidikan dan Hukum Islam
Miftakhul Huda
Universitas Narotama Surabaya, Indonesia
Religion Humanities Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Social Sciences Other

Published : 22 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 22 Documents
Search

 1   2   3 
Legal Responsibility of Taxpayers Upon the Absence of Agreement at the Notice of Tax Audit Result Stage Based on the Principle of Due Process of Law Vivi Violeta; Miftakhul Huda
Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities Vol. 6 No. 5 (2026): (JLPH) Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities
Publisher : Dinasti Research

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38035/jlph.v6i5.3652

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the alignment of the regulation on the Notice of Tax Audit Result (Surat Pemberitahuan Hasil Pemeriksaan / SPHP) with the principle of due process of law, and to reconstruct the legal responsibility of taxpayers in the event that an agreement is not reached during this stage. Thus far, the legal relationship between tax authorities (fiscus) and taxpayers at the SPHP stage has tended to be construed unilaterally. The absence of an agreement is frequently deemed an administrative failure on the taxpayer's part, resulting in the passive acceptance of a Tax Assessment Notice (Surat Ketetapan Pajak / SKP) or the necessity to pursue protracted tax litigation. Conversely, tax collection within a constitutional state (rechtsstaat) must be anchored in procedural justice, which guarantees the constitutional right of citizens to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem). The research method employed is normative legal research utilizing a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The results indicate that, essentially, the SPHP serves as an instrument of preventive legal protection that transforms tax audits from unilateral coercion into an accountable space for legal dialectics. This study argues that legal responsibility for the absence of an agreement at the SPHP stage must not be borne unilaterally; rather, it should be understood as a reciprocal legal responsibility. Taxpayers are obligated to act in good faith by providing true and complete information supported by valid evidence, whereas tax auditors are legally bound to objectively consider all such arguments before issuing an SKP. The failure to reach an agreement does not constitute administrative non-compliance, but rather a legitimate legal dialectic arising from differences in legal interpretation or factual evaluation. Therefore, the lack of an agreement at the SPHP stage must be resolved through the optimization of mechanisms that safeguard procedural justice, such as strengthening the role of the Audit Quality Assurance Team, in order to achieve fair legal certainty.
Kewenangan Kurator dalam Melaksanakan Sita Umum dalam Proses Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban  Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) Terhadap Objek Hak Tanggungan Mohammad Fauzi; Miftakhul Huda
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora Vol. 2 No. 3 (2026): JULI-SEPTEMBER
Publisher : Indo Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63822/z9md3k12

Abstract

This research is motivated by the conflict of norms between Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU and Law No. 4 of 1996 concerning Mortgage Rights in terms of handling the object of mortgage rights when the debtor is declared bankrupt or is undergoing the PKPU process. On one hand, bankruptcy law stipulates that a general seizure extends to all of the debtor's assets, including security right assets; on the other hand, security rights law grants the secured creditor holding such rights the privilege to independently execute the collateral. This conflict of norms creates serious legal uncertainty regarding the extent of the bankruptcy trustee's authority over security right assets within Indonesian bankruptcy practice. The research findings indicate that security right assets in bankruptcy occupy a position of normative dualism: they are simultaneously part of the bankruptcy estate subject to general seizure, yet they remain encumbered by the preferential execution rights of the secured creditor. The trustee's authority over security right assets is constrained by four limiting pillars: time constraints via a 90-day suspension mechanism; substantive limits on permissible actions; procedural limits requiring the supervisory judge's approval; and the obligation to respect the rights of secured creditors. Violations of these limits on authority entail personal liability for the trustee, whether civilly under Article 72 or criminally under Article 237 of the Bankruptcy Law.
Co-Authors Achmad Farid Budiyanto Agus Purwo Saputro Ari Prawesthi Arif Rahman Hakim Arum Sri Peni Dwany Linca Iswanto Ega Surya Perdana Febrian Rizki Pratama Goklas Tambun Joko Suyono Liliana Sysylia Darmono Lingga Felani Martin Setiawan Millah, Widatul Mohammad Fauzi Nako Tata Hullu Niken Arief Rahayuana Rantika Dinda Sastriyanti Simon Andrean Sudarso Syilvia Amelia Hidayah Titik Sri Hayati Vivi Violeta