Article 433Procedures for Decisions on Review by the Fixed Asset Valuation Review Board
第四百三十三条（固定資産評価審査委員会の審査の決定の手続）
Where the fixed asset valuation review board has received an application for review under paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, it must immediately conduct the investigation and other fact examination that it finds necessary, and make a decision on the review within 30 days from the date of receiving the application.
固定資産評価審査委員会は、前条第一項の審査の申出を受けた場合においては、直ちにその必要と認める調査その他事実審査を行い、その申出を受けた日から三十日以内に審査の決定をしなければならない。
Hearing of objections is conducted in writing; provided, however, that where the person who has applied for review so requests, the fixed asset valuation review board must give that person an opportunity to state opinions orally.
不服の審理は、書面による。ただし、審査を申し出た者の求めがあつた場合には、固定資産評価審査委員会は、当該審査を申し出た者に口頭で意見を述べる機会を与えなければならない。
Where necessary for the review, the fixed asset valuation review board may, on its own authority or at the request of a person concerned, request the person who has applied for review and persons in possession of materials necessary for the valuation of that person's fixed assets to submit materials necessary for the review, setting a reasonable period.
固定資産評価審査委員会は、審査のために必要がある場合においては、職権に基づいて、又は関係人の請求によつて審査を申し出た者及びその者の固定資産の評価に必要な資料を所持する者に対し、相当の期間を定めて、審査に関し必要な資料の提出を求めることができる。
Where necessary for the review, the fixed asset valuation review board may request a fixed asset valuer to give explanations on matters concerning the valuation report.
固定資産評価審査委員会は、審査のために必要がある場合においては、固定資産評価員に対し、評価調書に関する事項についての説明を求めることができる。
The person who has applied for review may, by document, inquire of the mayor of the municipality, requiring a written answer within a reasonable period to be set, about matters necessary to clarify that the assertion relating to the application is well-founded; provided, however, that this does not apply where the inquiry falls under any of the following items:
審査を申し出た者は、市町村長に対し、当該申出に係る主張に理由があることを明らかにするために必要な事項について、相当の期間を定めて、書面で回答するよう、書面で照会をすることができる。ただし、その照会が次の各号のいずれかに該当するときは、この限りでない。
an inquiry that is non-concrete or non-specific;
具体的又は個別的でない照会
an inquiry that constitutes a repetition of any previous inquiry;
既にした照会と重複する照会
an inquiry asking for an opinion;
意見を求める照会
an inquiry that requires unreasonable expense or time to answer;
回答するために不相当な費用又は時間を要する照会
an inquiry about matters concerning a fixed asset of which a person other than the person who has applied for the review is the owner.
当該審査を申し出た者以外の者が所有者である固定資産に関する事項についての照会
Where necessary for the review, the fixed asset valuation review board may, notwithstanding paragraph (2), request the attendance of the person who has applied for review and the mayor of the municipality, and conduct an oral hearing open to the public.
固定資産評価審査委員会は、審査のために必要がある場合においては、第二項の規定にかかわらず、審査を申し出た者及び市町村長の出席を求めて、公開による口頭審理を行うことができる。
When conducting the oral hearing under the preceding paragraph, the fixed asset valuation review board may request the attendance and testimony of fixed asset valuers and other persons concerned.
前項の口頭審理を行う場合には、固定資産評価審査委員会は、固定資産評価員その他の関係者の出席及び証言を求めることができる。
The chief reviewer is to direct the oral hearing under paragraph (6).
第六項の口頭審理の指揮は、審査長が行う。
The fixed asset valuation review board must prepare records of the proceedings and decisions of the review as provided for by the Municipal Ordinance of the municipality.
固定資産評価審査委員会は、当該市町村の条例の定めるところによつて、審査の議事及び決定に関する記録を作成しなければならない。
The fixed asset valuation review board must preserve the records under the preceding paragraph and make them available for inspection by persons concerned as it provides.
固定資産評価審査委員会は、前項の記録を保存し、その定めるところによつて、これを関係者の閲覧に供しなければならない。
The provisions of Articles 24 and 27, Article 29, paragraph (1) main text, Article 29, paragraphs (2) and (5), Article 30, paragraphs (1) and (3), Article 32, Articles 34 through 37, Article 38 (excluding paragraph (6)), Article 39, Article 41, paragraphs (1) and (2) and paragraph (3) of that Article (limited to the part relating to notice that the procedures for proceedings have been concluded), Article 44, Article 45, paragraphs (1) and (2), Article 50, paragraph (1) (excluding the part relating to the review officer's written opinion and the written responses of the Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. and deliberative councils, etc.), Article 51, paragraphs (1) through (3), and Article 53 of the Administrative Complaint Review Act apply mutatis mutandis to the decision on review under paragraph (1). In this case, the term "review officer" in these provisions (excluding Article 44 of that Act) is deemed to be replaced with "reviewing agency"; in Article 24, paragraph (1) of that Act, the phrase "the reviewing agency" is deemed to be replaced with "the fixed asset valuation review board that has received an application for review under Article 432, paragraph (1) of the Local Tax Act (referred to as "reviewing agency" below)" and the phrase "the procedures for proceedings prescribed in the following Section" is deemed to be replaced with "the procedures for decision on review prescribed in Article 433 of the Local Tax Act"; in Article 29, paragraph (1) main text of that Act, the phrase "When having been nominated by the reviewing agency, a review officer must immediately" is deemed to be replaced with "When an application for review has been made, a review officer must, except where that application for review is dismissed under Article 24, promptly"; in Article 37, paragraphs (1) and (3) of that Act, the phrase "the procedures for proceedings specified in Article 31 through the preceding Article" is deemed to be replaced with "the procedures for decision on review prescribed in Article 433 of the Local Tax Act"; in Article 38, paragraph (1) of that Act, the phrase "the documents stated in the items of Article 29, paragraph (4), or the documents or other objects submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 32, paragraph (1) or (2), or Article 33" is deemed to be replaced with "the documents or other objects submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 32, paragraph (1) or (2), or the materials that were required to be submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 433, paragraph (3) of the Local Tax Act" and the phrase "those documents or copies of those documents" is deemed to be replaced with "those documents or copies of those materials"; in paragraphs (4) and (5) of that Article, the phrase "Cabinet Order" is deemed to be replaced with "Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance"; in Article 41, paragraph (2), item (i), (e) of that Act, the phrase "the provisions of the first sentence of Article 33:documents or other objects" is deemed to be replaced with "the provisions of Article 433, paragraph (3) of the Local Tax Act:materials"; in item (ii) of that paragraph, the phrase "an oral opinion statement" is deemed to be replaced with "the opportunity to state opinions orally prescribed in the proviso to Article 433, paragraph (2) of the Local Tax Act"; in Article 44 of that Act, the phrase "When the reviewing agency has received a response to the consultation from the Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. (if the consultation under the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article is not necessary (excluding the cases falling under item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph), when the review officer's written opinion has been submitted, and if the case falls under item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph, when the case has gone through the deliberations prescribed in item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph)" is deemed to be replaced with "When the reviewing agency has concluded the procedures for proceedings"; and in Article 53 of that Act, the phrase "the documents or other objects submitted in response to a request for submission under the provisions of Article 33" is deemed to be replaced with "the materials that were required to be submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 433, paragraph (3) of the Local Tax Act".
行政不服審査法第二十四条、第二十七条、第二十九条第一項本文、第二項及び第五項、第三十条第一項及び第三項、第三十二条、第三十四条から第三十七条まで、第三十八条（第六項を除く。）、第三十九条、第四十一条第一項及び第二項、同条第三項（審理手続を終結した旨の通知に関する部分に限る。）、第四十四条、第四十五条第一項及び第二項、第五十条第一項（審理員意見書並びに行政不服審査会等及び審議会等の答申書に関する部分を除く。）、第五十一条第一項から第三項まで並びに第五十三条の規定は、第一項の審査の決定について準用する。この場合において、これらの規定（同法第四十四条の規定を除く。）中「審理員」とあるのは「審査庁」と、同法第二十四条第一項中「審査庁」とあるのは「地方税法第四百三十二条第一項の審査の申出を受けた固定資産評価審査委員会（以下「審査庁」という。）」と、「次節に規定する審理手続」とあるのは「同法第四百三十三条に規定する審査の決定の手続」と、同法第二十九条第一項本文中「審査庁から指名されたときは、直ちに」とあるのは「審査の申出がされたときは、第二十四条の規定により当該審査の申出を却下する場合を除き、速やかに」と、同法第三十七条第一項及び第三項中「第三十一条から前条までに定める審理手続」とあるのは「地方税法第四百三十三条に規定する審査の決定の手続」と、同法第三十八条第一項中「第二十九条第四項各号に掲げる書面又は第三十二条第一項若しくは第二項若しくは第三十三条の規定により提出された書類その他の物件」とあるのは「第三十二条第一項若しくは第二項の規定により提出された書類その他の物件又は地方税法第四百三十三条第三項の規定によって提出させた資料」と、「当該書面若しくは当該書類の写し」とあるのは「当該書類若しくは当該資料の写し」と、同条第四項及び第五項中「政令」とあるのは「条例」と、同法第四十一条第二項第一号ホ中「第三十三条前段 書類その他の物件」とあるのは「地方税法第四百三十三条第三項 資料」と、同項第二号中「口頭意見陳述」とあるのは「地方税法第四百三十三条第二項ただし書に規定する口頭で意見を述べる機会」と、同法第四十四条中「行政不服審査会等から諮問に対する答申を受けたとき（前条第一項の規定による諮問を要しない場合（同項第二号又は第三号に該当する場合を除く。）にあっては審理員意見書が提出されたとき、同項第二号又は第三号に該当する場合にあっては同項第二号又は第三号に規定する議を経たとき）」とあるのは「審理手続を終結したとき」と、同法第五十三条中「第三十三条の規定による提出要求に応じて提出された書類その他の物件」とあるのは「地方税法第四百三十三条第三項の規定によって提出させた資料」と読み替えるものとする。
When the fixed asset valuation review board has made a decision under paragraph (1), it must notify in writing the person who filed the application for review and the mayor of the municipality, within 10 days from the date of the decision. In this case, if no decision has been made by the time limit referred to in that paragraph, it may deem that a decision to dismiss the application for review has been made.
Read this with the articles around it
ownermachine translation
「所有者」
In Article 702, paragraph 1 on city planning tax (都市計画税), the person who is treated as, or deemed to be, the owner of the land or house for fixed assets tax (固定資産税) under Article 343 (other than its paragraphs 3, 9 and 10).
Defined inArticle 702, paragraph (2)
Administrative Complaint Review Board
行政不服審査会
A board set up in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (総務省) to deal with the matters the Administrative Complaint Review Act puts in its charge (Administrative Complaint Review Act, Article 67). Where the agency deciding a request for review (審査請求) is the competent minister (主任の大臣), the Grand Steward of the Imperial Household Agency (宮内庁長官) or the head of certain agencies, it must as a rule consult the board once the review officer (審理員) has handed in an opinion — but not, among other cases, where a council already deliberated on the disposition (処分), where the person requesting the review has said they do not want the board consulted and no intervenor (参加人) objects, where the request is unlawful and is dismissed, or where a disposition other than one refusing an application is to be revoked in full, or an application is to be granted in full, and no one has opposed that; where the agency is the head of a local government (地方公共団体), it consults a body the local government sets up instead (Articles 43, paragraph (1), and 81). Another Act can send the consultation to a body of its own instead, or do without it: a request for review of a decision on disclosure under the Act on Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs is put to the Information Disclosure and Personal Information Protection Review Board (情報公開・個人情報保護審査会) (Act on Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs, Articles 18, paragraph (2), and 19, paragraph (1); Administrative Complaint Review Act, Article 1, paragraph (2)). The board has nine members, part-time, though up to three may be full-time (Article 68), appointed by the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications (総務大臣), with the consent of both Houses of the Diet (国会), from people who can judge fairly and have outstanding insight into law or administration, for three years (Article 69, paragraphs (1) and (4)). It examines each case in a panel of three members it names, or of all its members where it so decides (Article 72). When it has answered a consultation, it sends a copy of its written report (答申書) to the person who requested the review and to any intervenor, and makes the report public (Article 79). The agency that consulted it must then make its determination (裁決) without delay, and where the determination's conclusion differs from the report, it must give the reasons for that (Articles 44 and 50, paragraph (1), item (iv)).
Written by AI using Administrative Complaint Review Act, Arts. 43, 44, 50, 67, 68, 69, 72, 79, 81 and Act on Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs, Arts. 18, 19 as a reference.
Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance
条例
A rule a local government makes for itself: a prefecture (都道府県), a city, town or village (市町村), or one of Tokyo's special wards (特別区) (Local Autonomy Act, Articles 1-3, 281 and 283). Its assembly (議会), whose members the residents elect, passes it (Articles 89 and 96, paragraph (1), item (i)), and its head — the governor or the mayor (Article 139) — promulgates it, that is, makes it public so that it can take effect (Article 16). The Constitution lets local governments make them within the limits of Acts (Constitution, Article 94), and one may not go against the national laws and regulations (法令), such as Acts, Cabinet Orders (政令) and Ministerial Orders (省令) (Local Autonomy Act, Article 14, paragraph (1)). Unless national laws and regulations provide otherwise, a local government can impose a duty or restrict a right only by one of these (Article 14, paragraph (2)), and it may write into one penalties for breaking it, within limits the Local Autonomy Act sets (Article 14, paragraph (3)). It is made for that local government's own affairs (Article 2, paragraph (2) and Article 14, paragraph (1)), so the same matter can be handled differently from one place to the next. It is a local rule, not a national one: an "ordinance" in the name of a national rule, such as an Ordinance for Enforcement of an Act, is usually a Ministerial Order (省令) or another national instrument.
Written by AI using Constitution, Art. 94 and Local Autonomy Act, Arts. 1-3, 2, 14, 16, 89, 96, 139, 281, 283 as a reference.