Act on General Rules for National Taxes

If a written request for review violates the provisions of Article 87 (Matters to Be Stated in a Written Request for Review, etc.) or Article 124 (Statement of Name, Domicile and Identification Number of Person Submitting Documents), the President of the National Tax Tribunal must set a reasonable period and require that the deficiency be corrected within that period. In this case, if the deficiency is minor, the President of the National Tax Tribunal may correct it ex officio.

When required to make the correction referred to in the preceding paragraph, the requester for review may also make it by appearing at the National Tax Tribunal, stating the matters to be corrected, and confirming a document in which an official of the National Tax Tribunal has recorded the content of the statement.

In the case referred to in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, if the requester for review does not correct the deficiency within the period referred to in that paragraph, the President of the National Tax Tribunal may, without going through the review proceedings prescribed in the following Article through Article 97-4 (Review Proceedings by the Presiding Tribunal Judge, etc.), dismiss the request for review without prejudice by a decision under Article 98, paragraph (1) (Decisions).

The same as in the preceding paragraph applies if it is clear that a request for review is unlawful and cannot be corrected.

The requester for review, the intervenors and the agency that made the original disposition prescribed in paragraph (1) of the following Article (hereinafter referred to as the "parties to the proceedings"), and the presiding tribunal judge, must, in order to achieve a simple, prompt and fair examination, cooperate with one another in the examination and seek to ensure the systematic progress of the review proceedings.

When the President of the National Tax Tribunal has accepted a written request for review, the President of the National Tax Tribunal is to set a reasonable period and have the head of the administrative organ concerned with the disposition that is the subject of the request for review (or, for a disposition prescribed in Article 75, paragraph (2) (limited to the part concerning item (i)) (Request for Reinvestigation of a Disposition Based on an Investigation by Officials of a Regional Taxation Bureau), the relevant regional commissioner; hereinafter referred to as the "agency that made the original disposition") submit a written answer, except where the request for review is dismissed without prejudice under Article 92 (Decision of Dismissal without Prejudice Made without Going through Review Proceedings). In this case, the President of the National Tax Tribunal is to send the accepted written request for review to the agency that made the original disposition.

The written answer referred to in the preceding paragraph must state the assertions of the agency that made the original disposition in response to the object of and reasons for the request for review.

When a written answer has been submitted by the agency that made the original disposition, the President of the National Tax Tribunal must send it to the requester for review and the intervenors.

The President of the National Tax Tribunal designates one presiding tribunal judge and two or more associate tribunal judges to investigate and examine a case concerning a request for review.

The persons designated by the President of the National Tax Tribunal under the preceding paragraph must be persons other than the following:

a person who was involved in the disposition to which the request for review pertains or in the determination on a request for reinvestigation concerning that disposition;

the requester for review;

the spouse of the requester for review, a relative of the requester within the fourth degree of kinship, or a relative living with the requester;

an agent of the requester for review;

a person who was formerly a person listed in the preceding two items;

a guardian, supervisor of a guardian, curator, supervisor of a curator, assistant or supervisor of an assistant of the requester for review;

an interested person prescribed in Article 109, paragraph (1) (Intervenors).

The requester for review may submit a document stating a rebuttal to the matters stated in the written answer sent under Article 93, paragraph (3) (Sending of the Written Answer) (hereinafter referred to as a "written rebuttal" in this Article and Article 97-4, paragraph (2), item (i), (b) (Conclusion of Review Proceedings)). In this case, if the presiding tribunal judge has set a reasonable period within which the written rebuttal is to be submitted, it must be submitted within that period.

An intervenor may submit a document stating an opinion on the case concerning the request for review (hereinafter referred to as an "intervenor's written opinion" in this Article and Article 97-4, paragraph (2), item (i), (c)). In this case, if the presiding tribunal judge has set a reasonable period within which the intervenor's written opinion is to be submitted, it must be submitted within that period.

The presiding tribunal judge must send a written rebuttal submitted by the requester for review to the intervenors and the agency that made the original disposition, and an intervenor's written opinion submitted by an intervenor to the requester for review and the agency that made the original disposition, respectively.

If the requester for review or an intervenor so petitions, the presiding tribunal judge must give the person who made the petition an opportunity to state an opinion orally on the case concerning the request for review.

In making the statement of opinion under the preceding paragraph (referred to as an "oral statement of opinion" in the following paragraph and Article 97-4, paragraph (2), item (ii) (Conclusion of Review Proceedings)), the person who made the petition referred to in the preceding paragraph may, with the permission of the presiding tribunal judge, ask questions of the agency that made the original disposition concerning the case concerning the request for review.

The provisions of the proviso to Article 84, paragraph (1), and paragraphs (2), (3) and (5) of that Article (Procedures for Determinations, etc.) apply mutatis mutandis to the oral statement of opinion referred to in paragraph (1). In this case, the term "reinvestigation authority" in paragraph (2) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "presiding tribunal judge", the phrase "the requester for reinvestigation and the intervenors" with "all parties to the proceedings", the term "reinvestigation authority" in paragraph (3) of that Article with "presiding tribunal judge", and the phrase "the reinvestigation authority or the official referred to in the preceding paragraph" in paragraph (5) of that Article with "the presiding tribunal judge".

An associate tribunal judge may, under the orders of the presiding tribunal judge, give the permission referred to in paragraph (2) and perform the acts referred to in Article 84, paragraph (5) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph following the deemed replacement of terms.

The requester for review or an intervenor may submit documentary evidence or articles of evidence.

The agency that made the original disposition may submit documents and other articles proving the facts constituting the grounds for the disposition.

In the cases referred to in the preceding two paragraphs, if the presiding tribunal judge has set a reasonable period within which the documentary evidence or articles of evidence, or the documents or other articles, are to be submitted, they must be submitted within that period.

When it is necessary for conducting the examination, the presiding tribunal judge may, upon petition by a party to the proceedings or ex officio, take the following actions:

questioning the requester for review or the agency that made the original disposition (referred to as the "requester for review, etc." in paragraph (4)), or a related person or other witness;

requiring the owner, possessor or custodian of the books and documents or other articles of a person prescribed in the preceding item to submit those articles within a reasonable period set for that purpose, or retaining articles submitted by those persons;

inspecting the books and documents or other articles of a person prescribed in item (i);

having an expert witness give an expert opinion.

A National Tax Tribunal judge, an assistant National Tax Tribunal judge or any other official of the National Tax Tribunal may, upon commission by or under the orders of the presiding tribunal judge, take the actions listed in item (i) or (iii) of the preceding paragraph.

When taking the actions listed in paragraph (1), items (i) and (iii), a National Tax Tribunal judge, an assistant National Tax Tribunal judge or any other official of the National Tax Tribunal must carry a certificate of identification and present it upon request by a person concerned.

If, because a requester for review, etc. (including a person having a special relationship with the requester for review that is specified by Cabinet Order) fails, without a justifiable reason, to respond to questioning, a request for submission or an inspection under paragraph (1), items (i) through (iii) or paragraph (2), it has become extremely difficult to clarify the basis for all or part of the assertions of the requester for review, etc., the President of the National Tax Tribunal may decline to adopt the assertions of the requester for review, etc. relating to that part.

The authority of the relevant officials prescribed in paragraph (1) or (2) must not be construed as being granted for the purpose of criminal investigation.

If the presiding tribunal judge finds that, because the case concerning a request for review is complex, such as by involving numerous or intricate matters to be examined, or due to other circumstances, it is necessary to conduct the review proceedings prescribed in Article 95-2 through paragraph (1) of the preceding Article (Oral Statement of Opinion, etc.) in a systematic manner in order to conduct a prompt and fair examination, the presiding tribunal judge may designate a date and place, summon the parties to the proceedings, and hear their opinions in advance on petitions concerning those review proceedings.

If the parties to the proceedings reside in a distant place or in other cases where the presiding tribunal judge finds it appropriate, the presiding tribunal judge may, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order, hear the opinions referred to in the preceding paragraph by a means that enables the presiding tribunal judge and the parties to the proceedings to communicate with one another by sending and receiving voice.

When the presiding tribunal judge has heard opinions under the preceding two paragraphs, the presiding tribunal judge is to determine without delay the dates and places of the review proceedings prescribed in Article 95-2 through paragraph (1) of the preceding Article and the scheduled time for concluding the review proceedings under Article 97-4, paragraph (1) (Conclusion of Review Proceedings), and notify the parties to the proceedings of these. The same applies when the presiding tribunal judge has changed that scheduled time.

Until the review proceedings are concluded under paragraph (1) or (2) of the following Article, a party to the proceedings may request the presiding tribunal judge to allow inspection of the documents or other articles submitted under Article 96, paragraph (1) or (2) (Submission of Documentary Evidence, etc.) or Article 97, paragraph (1), item (ii) (Questioning, Inspection, etc. for Examination) (or, for an electronic or magnetic record, inspection of the matters recorded in it as displayed in the manner specified by Ministry of Finance Order), or to deliver a copy of those documents or a document stating the matters recorded in that electronic or magnetic record. In this case, the presiding tribunal judge may not refuse the inspection or delivery unless the presiding tribunal judge finds that there is a risk of harm to the interests of a third party, or there is another justifiable reason.

When the presiding tribunal judge intends to allow inspection under the preceding paragraph or to make a delivery under that paragraph, the presiding tribunal judge must hear the opinion of the person who submitted the documents or other articles subject to that inspection or delivery; provided, however, that this does not apply if the presiding tribunal judge finds it unnecessary.

The presiding tribunal judge may designate the date and time and the place for inspection under paragraph (1).

A requester for review or intervenor who receives a delivery under paragraph (1) must, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order, pay a fee in the amount specified by Cabinet Order within the limits of the actual cost.

If the presiding tribunal judge finds that there is economic hardship or another special reason, the presiding tribunal judge may, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order, reduce or waive the fee referred to in the preceding paragraph.