cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Mochamad Nuruz Zaman
Contact Email
scientium@scientium.co.id
Phone
+6281232891993
Journal Mail Official
editorial@scientium.co.id
Editorial Address
Jl Tebet Raya No.2 Blok C lt.3 Tebet Barat, Tebet. Jakarta Selatan, DKI Jakarta - 12810
Location
Kota adm. jakarta selatan,
Dki jakarta
INDONESIA
Scientium Law Review
Published by Scientia Integritas Utama
ISSN : 28295811     EISSN : 28297644     DOI : https://doi.org/10.56282/slr.v1i1.52
Core Subject : Humanities, Social,
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
Scientium Law Review aims to publish new work of the comprehensive critical analysis and research on all law issues. The journal may include but are not limited to various fields of law such as civil law, law and history, religious jurisprudence law, constitutional law, legal philosophy, sociology of law, adat law, legal theory, Islamic law, international law, environmental law, legal pluralism, and another section related to contemporary issues in legal scholarship.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)" : 5 Documents clear
REFORMULATION OF THE PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE AUDIT TYPE IN TAXATION: WHEN LEGAL HERMENEUTICS MEETS THE RULE OF LAW (Part 1 of 2) Henry D. P. Sinaga; Denny Irawan
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (196.073 KB) | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.79

Abstract

The existence of facts in the form of two pretrial decisions decided that the two preliminary evidence examinations were invalid and declared null and void. It needs to address the shift in meaning that led to this type of preliminary evidence examination. Two conclusions can be drawn based on the legal hermeneutics method, which is framed within the framework of the rule of law. First, there has been a shift in the meaning of preliminary evidence examination contained in the KUP Law, namely the existence of a closed type of preliminary evidence audit in Government Number 74 of 2011 and PMK Number 239/PMK.03/2014. This meaning can be a problem in terms of tax enforcement that must be proportional to upholding legal certainty, public benefits, and justice, and in terms of administering government administration which must be based on the principle of legality, the focus of protection of human rights, and the general direction of good governance. Second, the reformulation of preliminary evidence audit must be carried out by eliminating the prevailing type of closed preliminary evidence audit. As the understanding and explanatory side of legal hermeneutics has defined preliminary evidence examination as a series of activities carried out by preliminary evidence auditors against individuals and or entities related to circumstances, actions, and/or evidence that can provide indications of a strong suspicion that a crime in the taxation sector is being or has occurred and can cause losses to state revenue. It is necessary to delete the legal text related to the type of closed preliminary evidence audit in a secure manner.
SENTENCING DISPARITY IN TAXATION AND EFFORTS TO OVERCOME THE CONSEQUENCES (Part 1 of 2) Didit Santoso; Henry DP Sinaga
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.125

Abstract

Gap yuridis dan gap empiris yang terjadi dalam banyak putusan tindak pidana di bidang perpajakan di Indonesia masih menimbulkan seringnya permasalahan sentencing disparity tanpa dasar pembenaran yang jelas. Perlu dan mendesak untuk melakukan studi yuridis normative dalam menjawab 2 (dua) rumusan permasalahan yang ada, mengingat fungsi utama pajak adalah fungsi budgeter dan fungsi mengatur (regulerend). Disimpulkan bahwa saat ini hanya terdapat Pasal 44B UU KUP yang dapat mengurangi terjadinya sentencing disparity di bidang perpajakan di Indonesia, sehingga perlu konsep equality before the law dan checks and balances dalam menangani sentencing disparity di Indonesia, yang umumnya terdiri dari disparitas lintas integrated criminal justice system, disparitas horizontal peradilan, dan disparitas vertikal peradilan. Disarankan agar terdapat Peraturan Mahkama Agung tentang Pedoman Pemidanaan Tindak Pidana Perpajakan, dan Peraturan Kejaksaaan Agung tentang Pedoman Penuntutan dan Pra-Penuntutan Tindak Pidana di Bidang Perpajakan, eksaminasi dan diseminasi public setiap putusan yang menghasilkan putusan yang mengandung sentencing disparity tanpa dasar pembenaran yang jelas, dan penguatan lembaga pengawas masing-masing integrated criminal justice system, seperti Komisi Yudisial, dan Mahkamah Agung.
SAMPLING AUDIT OF THE TAX AUDIT IN INDONESIA: A LEGAL CERTAINTY PERSPECTIVE Denny Irawan
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.148

Abstract

The problems of low Audit Coverage Ratio (ACR) and Additional Underpaid Tax Assessment Letters (SKPKBT), tax audit period, and tax determination expiration considerations indicate that this phenomenon is necessary to produce an ideal (legal) concept related to audit sampling in tax audits for Indonesia. Based on the normative juridical method, it was concluded that there is a need for legal certainty related to audit sampling based on the constitutional order in connection with the fulfillment of tax law requirements as a lex specialist derogat lex generalist. The absence of audit sampling provisions in tax audits is based on the absence of statutory regulations binding on taxpayers, tax authorities, and certain third parties. In fact, there is always uncertainty in tax audits, there is a need for sufficient legal evidence in tax audits, there is a need to consider efficiency and economic benefits in carrying out tax audits, there is a need to use the means of professional judgment of tax examiners, and a reasonable basis is needed to conclude the characteristics of a population in a tax audit.
Political Law of General Elections in the Reformation Era in Indonesia Adi Hardiyanto Wicaksono
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.182

Abstract

Masih terdapat beberapa kendala dalam pemilihan umum (Pemilu) di Indonesia, seperti potensi pelanggengan kekuasaan dan kisruh pembuatan pemilih tetap. Berdasarkan metode yuridis normative, dihasilkan 2 (dua) kesimpulan. Pertama, pengaturan Pemilu di era reformasi di Indonesia masih lebih baik bila dibandingkan dengan era demokrasi terpimpin danera Orde Baru. Kedua, penegakan hukum pemilihan umum di era reformasi di Indonesia masih harus berdasarkan asas legalitas. Hal ini dapat menimbulkan beberapa kendala, seperti susahnya menjerat money politics dan harus melibatkan beebrapa unsur institusi penagak hukum terkait. Disarankan terdapat pembaharuan hukum terkait lembaga penegak hukum tunggal pada masing-masing tahapan, mulai dari penyelidikan, penyidikan, dan penuntutan tindak pidana Pemilu.
CRIMINAL TAX LIABILITY OF CORPORATE TAXPAYER IN INDONESIA Anton Hartanto; Henry D. P. Sinaga
Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)
Publisher : Scientia Integritas Utama

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56282/slr.v1i2.217

Abstract

Peranan penting Wajib Pajak Badan terhadap penerimaan pajak di Indonesia belum didukung dengan pembentukan hukum dan penegakan hukum terhadap pertanggungjawaban pidana Wajib Pajak Badan yang adil dan berkamnfaatan public. Berdasarkan gap yuridis dan gap empiris yang ada, perlu melakukan studi doctrinal atau yuridis normative dalam menjawab rumusan permasalahan yang ada. Beradsarkan bahan-bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier, studi ini menghasilkan dua kesimpulan. Pertama, terdapat kekosongan hukum yang mengatur pertanggungjawaban pidana Wajib Pajak Badan dalam UU KUP mengingat terdapatnya amanah Pasal 23A UUD NRI Tahun 1945 dan asas legalitas yang dirumuskan dalam Pasal 1 ayat (1) KUHP. Kedua, ideal penegakan hukum terhadap pertanggungjawaban pajak wajib pajak badan harus dilakukan melalui pengaturan pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi atau Wajib Pajak Badan dalam pembaharuan UU KUP dan/atau sejak berlakunya UU No. 1 Tahun 2023 (UU KUHP) pada tahun 2025 yang akan datang. Namun, dalam rangka keseragaman penanganan perkara tindak pidana perpajakan oleh integrated criminal justice system di Indonesia terhadap Korporasi atau Wajib Pajak Badan, penegakan hukum dibidang perpajakan terhadap Wajib pajak badan/Korporasi harus tetap dijalankan demi rasa keadilan dan kemanfaatan public. Sehingga, keksoongan hukum dapat diminimalisir melalui Peraturan Jaksa Agung dan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung yang mengatur tentang pedoman penanganan perkara tindak pidana di bidang perpajakan yang dilakukan oleh Wajib Pajak Badan/Korporasi.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2022 2022


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 1 No. 3 (2022): Scientium Law Review Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR) Vol. 1 No. 1 (2022): Scientium Law Review (SLR)