Tax Observatory › Assessment, collection and litigation › Assessment notice signed under delegated authority: how late can the Revenue Agency prove the delegation in court?

Assessment notice signed under delegated authority: how late can the Revenue Agency prove the delegation in court?

In judgment No. 26868 of 14 October 2026, the Corte di cassazione (Italian Court of Cassation) held that, where the taxpayer disputes the delegation of authority to sign the avviso di accertamento (tax assessment notice), the delegation must be produced within the time limit in Article 32(1) of Legislative Decree No. 546/1992: if it is filed at the appeal hearing, it is late and the notice is void. The principle applies to proceedings whose first instance began on or before 4 January 2024. In proceedings begun on or after 5 January 2024, a delegation produced on appeal is a new document, admitted only if it is indispensable or if it could not be produced earlier for reasons not attributable to the party.

If the taxpayer disputes that the avviso di accertamento (tax assessment notice) was signed by an official holding a valid delegation, the Italian Revenue Agency (Agenzia delle entrate) must prove the delegation in court. In proceedings whose first instance began on or before 4 January 2024, it may also do so on appeal, but only within the time limit for filing documents, that is, no later than twenty clear days before the hearing. A delegation filed at the hearing is late, and the notice is void under Article 42(1) and (3) of Presidential Decree No. 600/1973. In proceedings begun after that date, a delegation produced on appeal is admitted only on the conditions laid down in Article 58(1) of Legislative Decree No. 546/1992, in its current wording.

The decision

Corte di cassazione, Fifth Civil Division, judgment No. 26868, filed on 14 October 2026 (public hearing of 16 September 2026), presiding judge Napolitano, reporting judge Sali, ECLI:IT:CASS:2026:26868CIV, General Register No. 1599/2016.

The case concerned two notices of accertamento sintetico (assessment of total income inferred from expenditure) for IRPEF (personal income tax) purposes for 2007 and 2008. In the initial appeal (ricorso introduttivo) to the tax court, the taxpayer had objected that the notices had not been signed by the head of the tax office and that there was no delegation; the Revenue Agency had filed the delegation only at the hearing at second instance, and the appeal court in Bolzano had admitted it.

The Court set aside the judgment and, deciding the case on the merits (Article 384(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure), allowed the taxpayer’s initial appeals, ordering the Revenue Agency to pay the costs of all three instances. In the wording applicable ratione temporis, Article 58 of Legislative Decree No. 546/1992 allowed new documents to be filed on appeal subject only to the limit in Article 32(1). The case law on the point is settled and the judgment breaks no new ground. The Court did not examine the taxpayer’s other twelve grounds, including those on the contraddittorio (prior discussion with the taxpayer), on the redditometro (expenditure-based method of inferring income) and on penalties, or the four grounds of the cross-appeal, all of which had been rendered moot (assorbiti).

The position today

Legislative Decree No. 220/2023, in force from 4 January 2024, rewrote Article 58: new documents are admitted on appeal only if the court considers them indispensable for its decision or if the party shows that it could not produce them at first instance for reasons not attributable to it. The Corte costituzionale (Italian Constitutional Court), in judgment No. 36 of 2025, struck down the prohibition in Article 58(3) on filing, on appeal, delegations, powers of attorney and other instruments conferring authority relevant to the signature, and confined the new rules to appeals in proceedings whose first instance was brought after the decree entered into force. The prohibition on filing proof of service of the challenged notice, or of the acts that are a precondition of its lawfulness, remains in place.

What matters, therefore, is the date on which the initial appeal was served. If it was served on or before 4 January 2024, the principle stated in the judgment applies; if it was served on or after 5 January 2024, the delegation is a new document subject to Article 58(1). The date of 1 September 2024, set by Article 4(2) of Legislative Decree No. 220/2023 for other changes, is not relevant. In our view, where the defect was raised in the initial appeal, the Revenue Agency will find it difficult to show that it could not produce the delegation earlier for reasons not attributable to it. The indispensability test remains available. Its application is not yet settled, and a delegation that is decisive for the validity of the notice might fall within it. In any event, the time limit of twenty clear days must be observed.

With effect from 1 January 2027, Article 42 of Presidential Decree No. 600/1973 will be carried over into Article 262 of the Consolidated Act on tax compliance and assessment (Legislative Decree No. 141/2026): paragraph 1 will remain unchanged, while paragraph 3 will classify an assessment notice lacking a signature as voidable rather than void. This is a textual alignment with Article 7-bis of the Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights (Statuto dei diritti del contribuente, Law No. 212/2000), which, with effect from 18 January 2024, treats defects affecting the validity of tax notices as grounds for annulment and reserves nullity for the cases listed in Article 7-ter. With effect from 1 January 2027, Articles 32 and 58 of Legislative Decree No. 546/1992 will also be carried over into Articles 80 and 112 of the Consolidated Act on tax justice (Legislative Decree No. 175/2024), whose application was deferred to 1 January 2027 by Decree-Law No. 200/2025. For appeals under the old rules still pending in 2027, we consider that the rule stated in the judgment continues to apply: Article 130 of the Consolidated Act on tax justice does not list Article 4(2) of Legislative Decree No. 220/2023 among the repealed provisions, and that Act contains no transitional rules for pending proceedings.

The strength of the objection should be weighed before considering the dispute-avoidance procedures: the adesione (agreed assessment), available only before the initial appeal is brought, or, once proceedings are pending, the conciliazione (judicial settlement). If the tax office issues a new notice, only the defects specific to that new notice are relevant.

In practice

• On receipt of the notice, the taxpayer’s representative checks who signed it. If the signatory is not the head of the tax office, the lack of delegation must be raised specifically in the initial appeal, failing which the objection is lost (Article 7-bis(2) of Law No. 212/2000); once it has been raised, according to the settled case law of the Corte di cassazione, the burden of proving the delegation lies with the tax authorities.
• In proceedings begun on or after 5 January 2024, the first instance is in practice where the delegation has to be produced: if the Revenue Agency does not file it, its absence should be pointed out in the written submissions (memoria illustrativa) and, on appeal, objection should be made to any document produced outside the scope of Article 58(1).
• At every instance, the filing dates should be checked in the electronic case file: a delegation filed after the time limit of twenty clear days is challenged in the written submissions (to be filed no later than ten clear days before the hearing); one produced at the hearing is challenged immediately, on the record.
• In proceedings begun on or before 4 January 2024, an appeal judgment that admitted a late delegation may be challenged before the Corte di cassazione for breach of Articles 32 and 58 of Legislative Decree No. 546/1992 and of Article 42 of Presidential Decree No. 600/1973 (Article 360(1), point 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure). The time limit is sixty days from service of the judgment or, if it has not been served, six months from its publication (Articles 325 and 327 of the Code of Civil Procedure, applicable under Article 62 of Legislative Decree No. 546/1992).
• Nullity arises from a defect of form and does not affect the merits of the tax claim: even after annulment, the tax office may issue a new, duly signed notice until the time limit for assessment has expired (Article 9-bis of Law No. 212/2000 preserves the possibility of remedying formal and procedural defects). It should therefore be checked first whether the tax year is still open to assessment.
• The notice should be kept together with the certificate of service, the initial appeal, the filing receipts and the hearing record.

Frequently asked questions

Is a delegation needed if the notice is signed by the head of the tax office?

No. The delegation matters only where the notice is signed by another official, who must belong to the managerial grade (carriera direttiva).

May the court raise the lack of delegation of its own motion?

No. For initial appeals subject to Article 7-bis of Law No. 212/2000, in force from 18 January 2024, paragraph 2 of that Article expressly rules it out. This date is not the same as 5 January 2024, which marks the dividing line for evidence on appeal. For earlier proceedings, the same result follows from the nature of tax proceedings as a challenge to a specific notice, in which the court examines the defects raised in the initial appeal. The Revenue Agency’s burden of proving the delegation arises only once the delegation has been disputed.

Does the judgment say anything about the content of the delegation?

No. The grounds concerning the reasons for and duration of the delegation and the name of the delegated official were not examined, because the decision stopped at the late filing.

Sources

Corte di cassazione, Fifth Civil Division, judgment No. 26868 of 14 October 2026 (hearing of 16 September 2026), ECLI:IT:CASS:2026:26868CIV, General Register No. 1599/2016.

Article 42 of Presidential Decree No. 600 of 29 September 1973, wording in force as at 17 October 2026, repealed with effect from 1 January 2027 and carried over into Article 262 of the Consolidated Act on tax compliance and assessment approved by Legislative Decree No. 141 of 5 August 2026 (Articles 367 and 368); Article 262(3) classifies the notice as voidable.

Articles 32, 58 and 62 of Legislative Decree No. 546 of 31 December 1992, wording in force as at 17 October 2026, repealed with effect from 1 January 2027; Articles 32 and 58 are carried over into Articles 80 and 112 of the Consolidated Act on tax justice approved by Legislative Decree No. 175 of 14 November 2024 (point (d) of Article 130(1), and Article 131(1), as amended by Article 4(3) of Decree-Law No. 200 of 31 December 2025, converted into law by Law No. 26 of 27 February 2026).

Point (bb) of Article 1(1) and Article 4(2) of Legislative Decree No. 220 of 30 December 2023.

Corte costituzionale, judgment No. 36 of 27 March 2025 (Official Gazette, First Special Series, No. 14 of 2 April 2025).

Articles 7-bis, 7-ter and 9-bis of Law No. 212 of 27 July 2000 (Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights).

Articles 325, 327, 360(1), point 3, and 384(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure.