Interpretive logic of the General Assembly of Iran’s Administrative Justice Court in Taxation lawsuits

Abstract

Obtaining the interpretive method (interpretive logic) of the General Assembly of the Administrative Court of Justice in tax disputes will provide the power to predict the performance of researchers, government agencies, taxpayers and tax lawyers, as well as creating the context to strengthen the talents and correct weaknesses of this organ in the interpretation of laws. This study seeks to answer the question of based on what approach the General Assembly of the Court of Administrative Justice interprets tax laws and what are the advantages and disadvantages of the interpretive logic of this institution? This study showed that this assembly has used all source-oriented and goal-oriented interpretive approaches, but its use of source- oriented approach is more than other approaches (i.e. teleological approaches), which is one of the strengths in the board's interpretive logic. However, one of the points to be criticized is: first, the non-observance of the "hierarchy in the use of linguistic methods", such as the preference of "ordinary interpretation" over "technical interpretation". Second, the slight use of a goal-oriented approach will also lead to a stagnation of this assembly in the interpretation of the rules.