PROBLEMATIKA SENGKETA FORMAL PAJAK: PENAFSIRAN “TANGGAL DITERIMA” DAN PENERAPAN “FORCE MAJEURE”

Abstrak

Ketegangan antara kepastian hukum dan keadilan substantif menjadi problematika mendasar dalam penyelesaian sengketa pajak di Indonesia, khususnya terkait syarat formal jangka waktu pengajuan banding dan gugatan. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis implikasi yuridis penerapan Verzendingstheorie (teori pengiriman) dalam definisi "tanggal diterima" sebagaimana diatur Pasal 1 angka 12 UU Pengadilan Pajak, serta inkonsistensi penerapan konsep force majeure. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis-normatif dengan pendekatan kasus (case approach) terhadap 21 putusan Pengadilan Pajak dan Mahkamah Agung periode 2021-2025. Temuan penelitian menunjukkan adanya disparitas putusan yang tajam yang menciptakan ketidakpastian hukum. Pada isu "tanggal diterima", dari 9 putusan yang dianalisis, hakim terpolarisasi antara pendekatan tekstual yang mengabaikan fakta logistik (5 putusan) dan pendekatan kontekstual yang mengakomodasi bukti pelacakan elektronik (4 putusan). Pada isu force majeure, dari 12 putusan yang dianalisis, 8 putusan ditolak karena standar pembuktian yang kaku, sementara alasan kegagalan sistem teknologi mulai diakui sebagai alasan pemaaf dalam putusan terbaru. Penelitian ini merekomendasikan rekonstruksi norma hukum acara melalui pergeseran paradigma menuju Ontvangsttheorie (teori penerimaan) yang memvalidasi bukti elektronik, serta reformulasi keadaan kahar menjadi konsep terbuka yang akomodatif terhadap gangguan sistem digital untuk menjamin hak konstitusional Wajib Pajak.

The tension between legal certainty and substantive justice is a fundamental problem in tax dispute resolution in Indonesia, particularly regarding the formal requirements for filing appeals and lawsuits. This study aims to analyze the juridical implications of the application of Verzendingstheorie (dispatch theory) in the definition of "date received" as stipulated in Article 1 number 12 of the Tax Court Law, as well as the inconsistency in the application of the force majeure concept. This research uses a normative-juridical method with a case approach to 21 decisions of the Tax Court and the Supreme Court for the period 2021-2025. The research findings show a sharp disparity in decisions that creates legal uncertainty. On the issue of "date received", out of 9 decisions analyzed, judges were polarized between a textual approach that ignored logistical facts (5 decisions) and a contextual approach that accommodated electronic tracking evidence (4 decisions). On the issue of force majeure, out of 12 decisions analyzed, 8 decisions were rejected due to rigid standards of proof, while reasons for technological system failure began to be recognized as excusable reasons in recent decisions. This study recommends reconstructing procedural law norms by shifting the paradigm towards Ontvangsttheorie (receipt theory) which validates electronic evidence, and reformulating force majeure into an open concept that accommodates digital system disruptions to guarantee the constitutional rights of Taxpayers.