The suspension of a criminal action is admissible when there is an installment payment of the tax debt that gave rise to the indictment. With this understanding, the 2nd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Justice of Paraná ordered the suspension of a criminal action against two businessmen accused of a tax crime.
The indictment, offered by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office, was accepted in October 2017, according to the Revista Consultor Jurídico on its website.
In May 2018, the tax debt that gave rise to the indictment was paid in installments with the Federal Revenue Service. In view of this, the businessmen’s defense requested that the proceeding be suspended.
Read also:
Federal Revenue Service regulates tax offsetting
Taxation of legal entities – new edition of the Federal Revenue Service’s Questions and Answers
The request was denied at first instance by the court of the 2nd Criminal Division of Londrina, on the grounds that the suspension of the criminal action would only be possible if the installment payment had been formalized before the receipt of the indictment.
The businessmen’s defense then submitted an appeal to the TJ-PR, alleging that the ultimate purpose of the installment payment is the full settlement of the debt that is the object of the criminal action, which is why it must be suspended until the definitive fulfillment of the obligation.
For the rapporteur in the panel, Appellate Judge José Carlos Dalacqua, even if the installment payment was made after the receipt of the indictment, it makes sense to suspend the criminal action until the settlement of the debt, since the understanding that the said negotiation must precede the receipt of the indictment is not settled.
“There being unequivocal demonstration by the petitioner/patient that there was an installment payment of the debt, even if it occurred after the receipt of the indictment, I understand that the order must be partially granted in order to suspend the continuation of the criminal action, until the full payment of the tax,” stated the appellate judge, in a vote followed unanimously.
Source: revista Consultor Jurídico/ Tadeu Rover
← Back to blog