In this sense, the prior appointment, whose purpose is the aforementioned, should not be considered as another “procedure” of the administrative procedure, whose novation would be subject to the principle of reservation of law, ex art 1.2 LPC. It cannot even be considered as a form of initiation of the procedure, although it may give rise to a subsequent initiation, which will be carried out through the corresponding channel, but whose existence and regulation is not subject to the rules of the administrative procedure within the scope of the AEAT. .
Regarding this, it should be noted that, although it is true that the information and guidance tasks are different from the beginning of the
Email Data administrative procedure, it is also true that when said advisory work is necessary to be able to start a procedure or to obtain a document that must be provided in one , since this requirement of the prior appointment affects the same procedure and/or the deadlines for compliance with the procedures thereof, it does acquire the category of one more procedure of said procedure not provided for in the LPAC.
This has been happening for many years in nationality and immigration , where personal appearance is required to carry out various procedures and is organized through the mandatory appointment system. The delay in granting appointments, in addition to causing a system of buying and selling appointments that has been denounced among others by the Valencian Ombudsman , has led the Courts to consider that the date of request for the appointment is identified with the of the start of the procedure ( STSJ of Madrid of 06/21/2019 , appeal 1023/2018 or STSJ Madrid no. 399/2012, of May 4 , appeal 1302/2011).
Zaloguj
Zarejestruj
FAQ
Szukaj
