Administrative and Tax Lawyer
Administrative and Tax Law
Against unlawful administrative acts, an action can, as a rule, be filed before the administrative court within 60 days of notification, and against tax or penalty assessment notices, before the tax court within 30 days. For zoning plan amendments, permit revocations, disciplinary sanctions, administrative fines, and tax penalties, the right route must be chosen without missing the deadlines.
Administrative justice — the branch of the judiciary comprising the administrative courts, the tax courts, and the Council of State (Danıştay) — resolves disputes between citizens and the state, and its filing deadlines are preclusive. Once the 60-day period running from notification of an administrative act, or the 30-day period for tax/penalty assessment notices, is missed, the act becomes final. Our office represents individuals and legal entities before the administrative judiciary in annulment and full remedy actions, zoning and urban transformation disputes, civil servant disciplinary sanctions, administrative fines, and public procurement processes; in tax disputes we also stand by taxpayers, from tax audits to settlement, and from the annulment of assessment notices to objections against electronic attachment (e-haciz).
The action for annulment: judicial review of administrative acts
Under Article 2 of the Code of Administrative Procedure No. 2577 (İYUK), an action for annulment is brought by persons whose interests are harmed, alleging that an administrative act is unlawful as to competence, form, cause, subject matter, or purpose. The filing period is 60 days before the administrative courts and 30 days before the tax courts, running from the day following written notification (İYUK Art. 7), and these periods are preclusive. Before filing suit, an application may be made to the superior authority (or, in its absence, to the authority that issued the act) for the act to be revoked or amended; this application suspends the filing period that has started to run, and upon rejection of the application, or if it goes unanswered for 30 days, the remaining period resumes (İYUK Art. 11). An annulment judgment renders the act void from the date it was issued; the administration must comply with the judgment within 30 days at the latest (İYUK Art. 28).
The full remedy action: compensation for harm caused by the administration
Those whose personal rights are directly harmed by the administration's acts or actions may seek compensation through a full remedy action (İYUK Arts. 12-13). For harm arising from an administrative act, the action can be filed together with the annulment action or following the annulment judgment. For claims arising from administrative actions (for example, defective road construction, service fault at a public hospital, flood damage caused by infrastructure), there is an important precondition: before filing suit, a written application must be made to the administration within 1 year of learning of the harm and, in any event, within 5 years of the action, requesting that the right be honored (İYUK Art. 13); the filing period runs upon the complete or partial rejection of that application. Framing the compensation amount correctly in the petition and using the amendment (ıslah) mechanism in time are the critical procedural tools that prevent loss of rights in these cases.
Stay of execution: an emergency brake against irreparable harm
Filing an administrative action does not automatically suspend the implementation of the contested act; acts such as demolition, permit revocation, or dismissal from public service can be physically executed while the case is pending. For this reason, İYUK Art. 27 provides that the court may order a stay of execution where two conditions are met together — implementation of the act would cause harm that is difficult or impossible to repair, and the act is clearly unlawful. The decision is given with reasons and generally after the administration's defense has been taken; where urgency exists, a temporary stay without awaiting the defense is also possible. If the stay request is rejected, there is a single right of objection. The most important point in practice is timing: the request must be made before the harm materializes and with the act's execution timetable in mind, and the petition must substantiate the irreparable harm with concrete documents.
Zoning, permit, and urban transformation disputes
The rapid development of Esenyurt, Beylikdüzü, and Büyükçekmece has made zoning plan amendments, building permit revocations, demolition orders, and zoning fines the busiest field of administrative disputes in our region. Zoning plans are posted for public review; objections filed within the posting period and suit within the period following it are the only way to prevent the plan from becoming final — against plans whose deadlines have passed, litigation is possible only through implementing acts (permit refusals, land readjustment, and the like). In demolition orders and in administrative fines imposed under Article 42 of the Zoning Law No. 3194, review covers both procedure (service, the content of the inspection report) and substance (the nature of the violation, the calculation); a stay of execution request is a standard component of these files. Objections to risky-structure findings under Law No. 6306 and the administrative acts of the transformation process are also part of our administrative litigation practice.
Civil servant disciplinary sanctions and the right of defense
Article 125 of the Civil Servants Law No. 657 regulates the sanctions of warning, reprimand, salary deduction, suspension of grade advancement, and dismissal from the civil service, together with the acts attached to each. The lawfulness of the disciplinary process is reviewed by reference to whether the investigation was duly opened, an investigator appointed, the right of defense afforded (no less than 7 days may be given for the defense, Art. 130 of Law No. 657), and whether sanction and act are proportionate. The annulment action is available against all disciplinary sanctions — including warning and reprimand. Acts not processed in time or barred by limitation, punishing the same act twice, and sanctions issued without taking the defense are the most frequent grounds for annulment in practice. Acts based on adverse security clearance findings and student disciplinary sanctions are reviewed by the administrative judiciary under similar principles.
Tax disputes: the assessment notice stage and the litigate-or-settle choice
With service of the tax/penalty assessment notice issued after a tax audit, the taxpayer faces three main routes, all of which must be exercised within the 30-day period: filing suit before the tax court, requesting settlement, or paying with a penalty reduction under Article 376 of the Tax Procedure Law (VUK). If settlement is reached, the minutes are final; no suit can then be brought on the settled matters — which is why the legal weaknesses of the assessment must be analyzed before sitting down at the settlement table. On the litigation route, the tax technique and audit reports underlying the assessment are reviewed as to procedure and substance; filing suit, as a rule, automatically suspends collection. In false document (VUK Art. 359) allegations, the criminal investigation running parallel to the administrative process requires the defense to be planned in coordination on both fronts.
Payment orders, e-haciz, and defenses at the collection stage
Finalized public receivables are pursued under Law No. 6183. A debtor who receives a payment order may, within 15 days of service, file suit before the tax court on the grounds that 'no such debt exists, the debt has been partly paid, or it is time-barred' (Law No. 6183, Art. 58); at this stage, objections going to the merits of the assessment are, as a rule, not heard — which is why not missing the assessment notice stage is vitally important. In electronic attachment (e-haciz) measures applied to bank accounts, review covers whether the payment order was duly served, the proportionality of the attachment, and whether the limits were observed for partially attachable receivables such as salaries. Deferral and installment plans and the benefit of restructuring laws are alternatives that must be weighed together with the litigation strategy; steps taken in the wrong order can forfeit the right to sue.
Appeal and cassation: remedies in the administrative judiciary
Against the judgments of the administrative and tax courts, an appeal may be filed with the regional administrative court within 30 days of service (İYUK Art. 45); in cases whose subject matter does not exceed the statutory threshold, first-instance judgments are final and the appellate route is closed. Against regional administrative court decisions, in the case types enumerated in the law (regulatory acts, tax and full remedy cases above a certain amount, and the like), a cassation appeal to the Council of State is available within 30 days of service (İYUK Art. 46). In matters subject to the expedited procedure (procurement, urgent expropriation, and the like), both the filing and the remedy periods are shortened, and the timetable runs far more tightly. Because the monetary thresholds are updated every year, checking file by file whether the judgment is final — so that time is not wasted on a challenge against an unappealable judgment — is an indispensable step.
Administrative litigation in our region and the most common mistakes
Administrative disputes from Büyükçekmece, Beylikdüzü, and Esenyurt are heard by the administrative and tax courts in Istanbul; in actions against municipal acts, the defendant administration may be the relevant district municipality or the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, and identifying the correct respondent is a critical element of the petition. The mistakes we see most often in practice: missing the 60- and 30-day periods with the thought 'I objected anyway' (not every application to the administration suspends the period; the conditions of İYUK Art. 11 must be met), procedural errors in challenging the demolition order and the fine in a single petition, failing to object to the zoning plan within the posting period, and trying to raise assessment-stage objections at the payment order stage. Since written procedure governs the administrative judiciary, a case is largely only as good as its first petition; a legal review before the petition is filed is the most valuable investment in this field.
Example scenario — a zoning fine and a demolition order
(The following example is fictional, constructed to illustrate a common case type; it does not refer to any actual client or case.) A business owner approaches us stating that the municipal council has imposed a zoning fine on the ground of an unpermitted addition to their building, that a demolition decision has been taken, and that the report has just been served. In the file, the inspection report and the council decision are first reviewed as to procedure: on what date, by whom, and how the violation was established, the method used to calculate the fine, and the validity of the service are examined. An annulment action within the 60-day period is then planned, together with a stay of execution request to prevent the demolition from being physically carried out; in parallel, the possibility of legalizing the structure through a permit is explored with the municipality. This scenario shows how, in administrative files, procedural review, deadline management, and contact with the administration are run as a single strategy.
Last updated:
Services We Provide in This Area
- Actions for the annulment of administrative acts
- Full remedy (administrative compensation) actions
- Zoning plan and building permit disputes
- Urban transformation and risky-structure objections
- Actions against civil servant disciplinary sanctions
- Objections to administrative fines
- Public procurement processes and debarment actions
- Student and higher education (YÖK) disciplinary disputes
- Actions for the annulment of tax and penalty assessment notices
- Pre- and post-assessment settlement proceedings
- Advisory during tax audits
- Objections to payment orders and electronic attachment (e-haciz)
- Defense against false document charges (Tax Procedure Law, Article 359)
- Debt restructuring and set-off/refund procedures
Frequently Asked Questions
Administrative and Tax Law: Frequently Asked Questions
For an assessment of your specific case, please book an appointment.
Couldn't find the answer to your question? Contact us →
Take the First Step
Your Legal Matter Cannot Wait
Missed deadlines mean lost rights. Let us assess your case together today, and give you a clear roadmap and a realistic expectation.