Evaluation of tax evidence, limits on administrative discretion, and proper assessment of technical evidence

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18800/themis.202601.001

Keywords:

Evidentiary assessment, Technical evidence, Due process, Motivation, Administrative discretion

Abstract

This article analyzes the evaluation of evidence in tax matters and the limits on administrative discretion regarding technical evidence. Based on doctrine and case law from the Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, and Tax Court, it examines the obligation to conduct a joint, reasoned, and properly motivated assessment of the evidence submitted by taxpayers.

Likewise, the article develops the requirement that any objection or rejection of technical evidence must be supported by objective and specialized criteria, avoiding arbitrary decisions or subjective assessments. Finally, the authors conclude that the comprehensive evaluation of evidence constitutes an essential standard to guarantee due process, the search for material truth, and the legitimacy of tax decisions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Lourdes Castillo Crisóstomo, Estudio Rodrigo

    Abogada. Máster en Tributación Internacional por la Escuela de Derecho de la Universidad de Nueva York. Profesora de Derecho Tributario I y II en la Universidad de Piura (UDEP). Socia en Estudio Rodrigo (Lima, Perú).
    Contacto: lcastillo@estudiorodrigo.com

  • Christian Del Carpio Torres, New York University

    Abogado. Máster en Tributación Internacional por la Escuela de Derecho de la Universidad de Nueva York. Profesor de Derecho Tributario I y II en la Universidad de Piura (UDEP). Tax Manager en Hunt Services Company (Lima, Perú).
    Contacto: christian_dt@hotmail.com

Downloads

Published

2026-09-03

Issue

Section

Procedimiento tributario y garantías del contribuyente

How to Cite

Evaluation of tax evidence, limits on administrative discretion, and proper assessment of technical evidence. (2026). THEMIS Revista de Derecho, 89, 15-29. https://doi.org/10.18800/themis.202601.001