Abstract
The surface water tax creates different perceptions due to differences in the imposition of taxes regulated in regional regulations and contracts of work, one of which contains tax provisions that apply specifically. This study discusses a review of the arguments for the Judicial Review Decision Number 2791/B/PK/PJK/2019). This study uses literature research methods. The results of this study concluded that the panel of judges granted the appeal applicant on the basis that the Papuan provincial government could not collect surface water tax because it was not in accordance with article 32A and article 33A of the income tax law and the contents of the contract of work.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Applied Business, Taxation and Economics Research
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
