Decisions of the 9th Chamber of the Council of State dated March 26, 2026

Conseil d'Etat Court of Cassation
Written by Paul Mispelon

On March 26, the Council of State issued rulings on tax matters concerning:

- The failure to specify the jurisdiction of the ordinary court or the administrative tax court regarding collection does not trigger the start of the time limit for bringing the matter before the court (Council of State, 9th Chamber, March 26, 2026, No. 500748, unpublished)

- the classification of a sum debited from a checking account in the name of a company—which resulted in the same sum being credited to the checking account of the shareholder company—as an advance rather than a gift (Court of Appeal, 9th Chamber, March 26, 2026, No. 499606, unpublished)‍

This monitoring service is provided by Mispelon Avocat, a law firm specializing in tax audits and tax litigation. You can stay updated by subscribing to the newsletter via this link.

Paul Mispelon
Previous

The inclusion of a tax debt in the liabilities section of the ISF form interrupts the statute of limitations
Next

ECHR and the right of access to information: First ruling by the Paris Administrative Court