Although the normative act that governs the Fiscal

firoj3131

Administrative Process (Decree nº does not stipulate a maximum period for consideration of requests and/or administrative appeals, with the enactment of Law nºthis legislative gap was filled, as its article 24 established the obligation to render a decision within a maximum period of 360 days, counting from the protocol. Therefore, regardless of possible justifications (excessive demands, shortage of personnel, among others), federal public administration bodies need to respond to those administered within a reasonable period of time, and it is not permissible to postpone, indefinitely, the conclusion of any administrative procedure.

Having resolved the issues linked to the right to monetary correction of book-entry credits (Repetitive Topic No. 164 and Precedent 411) and the deadline for assessing the request for reimbursement (Repetitive Topic No. 269), it remained to define the initial term for updating the EX Mobile Phone Numbers credits: if from from the date of filing the application or only after the 360-day period has elapsed. The matter was also affected by the repetitive appeals system. judgment held on February 12, 2020, the thesis was established that the initial term of monetary correction is the first day after the legal period available to the Tax Authorities to analyze the administrative request has expired.



The ministers understood that, as article 24 of Law No. 11,457/2007 gives the federal administration a period of 360 days to assess the request, it would not be reasonable to consider the Tax Authorities in default or to state that there is unjustified resistance before this period has elapsed. It appears, therefore, that over the last few years, the jurisprudence of the STJ has been consolidated in the sense that, although the rule is the impossibility of monetary correction of written credits, the delay in assessing and recognizing the request for reimbursement characterizes unjustified resistance.