CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG — 6 février 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s55E50B0E { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s59272B2C { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s780F5245 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; clear:both } .s71604A6B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; padding-top:1pt; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; font-size:10pt } .s2D1013D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; font-size:10pt } .sEB972D3E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt } .s4009AD62 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; padding-bottom:1pt; font-size:9pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D726B78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s8FE8E970 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:10pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s598389FB { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sF5E1C6CF { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; color:#ff0000 } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s223139AF { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sF43EBB0E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.85pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s743F3A55 { margin-right:0pt; margin-left:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sC03030BA { margin-left:10.75pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.6pt; font-weight:bold; text-transform:none } .sE485344B { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:28.6pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.6pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sAB51C47C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:27.94pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.26pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3E19E58F { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:27.26pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.94pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s980BA375 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s722A3A47 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:23.27pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:5.93pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s385DE409 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:26.61pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.59pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sB706BD6C { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s3A692EA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sC6C3E032 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:6pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s50CECF6C { width:104.2pt; display:inline-block } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sF7610474 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:36.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sAA38361A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17.85pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sC6C7C49B { margin-left:7.35pt; margin-bottom:6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-weight:normal; font-style:italic } .sDD998142 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sCD7D0356 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:4.85pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sD0682254 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:48.75pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s30C8A987 { width:4.78pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sB2ED4664 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:48.75pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s4E0353E8 { width:4.23pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s980E2CFD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:59.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.9pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sDE1AC5D1 { width:3.32pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sE4EB4F8C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:59.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.9pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s6F295A2 { width:1.1pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sF4DD38B3 { width:1.72pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s55F67FD3 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:51.05pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; line-height:113%; font-size:10pt } .s3970C00F { width:8.17pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sCD82236A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:51.05pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; line-height:113%; font-size:10pt } .s320E5A8E { width:5.95pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFABD3260 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:62.35pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-19.8pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s16F6432D { width:7.9pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sA6765C01 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:62.35pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-11.3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sFA550501 { width:6.3pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFF8BF293 { width:8.05pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sD051EF8 { width:3.72pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s7CAC83C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:19.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sC278ABC0 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.51pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s448F0C15 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s3A97705A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sD8AE9261 { width:36.9pt; display:inline-block } .s756AA39C { width:164.45pt; display:inline-block } .s5A65B3DC { width:46.56pt; display:inline-block } .s44B8752F { width:177.11pt; display:inline-block } .s7BE5FA7D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .sFF075836 { margin-right:7.05pt; margin-left:7.05pt; border-collapse:collapse; } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } FIRST SECTION CASE OF ITALGOMME PNEUMATICI S.R.L. AND OTHERS v. ITALY (Applications nos. 36617/18 and 12 others – see appended list)   JUDGMENT   Art 8 • Home • Correspondence • Access and inspection of applicants’ business premises, registered offices or premises used for professional activities, involving the examination, copying and seizure (in some cases) of accounting records, company books, invoices and other accounting documents as well as documents relevant for tax assessment purposes • “Quality of law” requirements not met • Domestic legal framework affording domestic authorities unfettered discretion with regard to impugned measures’ scope and conditions • Lack of sufficient procedural safeguards • Contested measures not subject to an effective ex post judicial review of their legality, necessity and proportionality • Interference “not in accordance with the law” Art 46 • General measures • Systemic problem • Respondent State to bring its legislation and practice into line with Court’s findings • Need for specific rules in domestic law, indicating circumstances for accessing and conducting on-site audits and tax checks on business premises and premises used for professional activities, establishing safeguards and providing for effective judicial review   Prepared by the Registry. Does not bind the Court.   STRASBOURG 6 February 2025   FINAL   06/05/2025   This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Italgomme Pneumatici S.r.l. and Others v. Italy, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:   Ivana Jelić , President ,   Erik Wennerström,   Alena Poláčková,   Georgios A. Serghides,   Raffaele Sabato,   Alain Chablais,   Artūrs Kučs , judges , and Ilse Freiwirth, Section Registrar, Having regard to: the applications (nos.   36617/18, 7525/19, 19452/19, 52473/19, 55943/19, 261/20, 7991/20, 8046/20, 20062/20, 34827/20, 26376/21, 28730/21 and 20133/22) against the Italian Republic lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by one Italian national and twelve legal entities (“the applicants”), whose particulars are set out in the appended table, on the various dates also indicated in the appended table; the decision to give notice to the Italian Government (“the Government”) of the applications; the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants; the comments submitted by ITALIASTATODIDIRITTO (Article 36 §   2 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 3 of the Rules of Court), an organisation which was granted leave to intervene by the President of the Section; Having deliberated in private on 14 January 2025, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: INTRODUCTION 1.     The applications concern access to and the inspection of the applicants’ business premises, registered offices or premises used for professional activities, and the examination, copying and seizure (in some cases) of their accounting records, company books, invoices and other mandatory documents relating to accounting, and several different types of documents relevant for tax assessment purposes. The contested measures were taken by officers or agents of the Revenue Police ( Guardia di Finanza ) or the Tax Authority ( Agenzia delle Entrate ) for the purpose of assessing the applicants’ compliance with their tax obligations. The applicants complained of the excessively broad scope of the discretion conferred on the domestic authorities by the national legislation and of the lack of sufficient procedural safeguards capable of protecting them against any abuse or arbitrariness, and in particular that there had been no ex ante and/or ex post judicial or independent review of the contested measures. They invoked Article 8 of the Convention, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 13 of the Convention, and Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. THE FACTS 2.     The details of the applicants and their representatives are set out in the Appendix. 3.     The Government were represented by their Agent, Mr L. D’Ascia, Avvocato dello Stato . 4.     The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. CIRCUMSTANCES COMMON TO ALL APPLICATIONS 5.     On different dates the applicants’ business premises, registered offices or premises used for professional activities were accessed and inspected by officers or agents of the Revenue Police or the Tax Authority so that their compliance with their tax obligations could be assessed. All the applicants are legal entities, except for Mr Terrenzio, who lodged application no.   20062/20 on behalf of the company of which he is the sole proprietor ( ditta individuale ). 6.     The authorisations to carry out the audits were issued by either the local head of the Tax Authority or the local head of the Revenue Police (see paragraphs   11-36 below) under Article 52 § 1 of Presidential Decree no.   633 of 26 October 1972 (“Decree no.   633/1972”, see paragraph 41 below) and/or Article   33 § 1 of Presidential Decree no. 600 of 29   September 1973 (“Decree no.   600/1973”, see paragraph 46 below). 7 .     The applicants and their representatives were asked to produce accounting records, company books, invoices and other mandatory documents concerning accounting, as well as several different types of documents relevant for tax assessment purposes relating to the years under audit. The requests did not concern only records and books which the applicants were legally obliged to keep, but “any other relevant document[s]” in their possession which were equivalent to accounts, such as records relating to transactions, assets or liabilities which were not on official statements (off-the-books records – scritture extracontabili ). 8.     The applicants and their representatives were informed that under Article   66 of Decree   no. 633/1972 and Article 68 of Decree no. 600/1973 (see paragraphs 45 and 50 below), the officers or agents carrying out the audits were bound by professional secrecy as regards the information acquired, and that the audits were subject to the guarantees and safeguards provided for under section 12 of Law no.   212 of 27 July 2000 (“Law no. 212/2000”, see paragraph 53 below). 9 .     They were further informed that: (i)   pursuant to Article 52 §   5 of Decree   no. 633/1972 and Article 32 § 4 of Decree no. 600/1973, in the event that they refused to produce the documents requested, they would be prevented from relying on them as evidence in their favour in any subsequent administrative and judicial proceedings ( preclusione probatoria , see paragraphs   41 and 46 below); (ii)   a refusal to produce books and documents whose possession was required by law or whose existence was known to the authorities would entail the imposition of the sanction provided for in Article   9 of Legislative Decree no.   471 of 18 December 1997 (“Decree no.   471/1997”, see paragraph 52 below); and (iii)   under Article 55 § 2 (1) of Decree no.   633/1972 (see paragraph 43 below) and Article 39 § 2 (c) of Decree no.   600/1973 (see paragraph 48 below), in the event of a failure to keep or produce the above-mentioned documents, the Tax Authority would be allowed to assess how many transactions had taken place and how much income had been received by resorting to presumptions ( presunzioni semplici ) based on the data and items which had been collected in other ways and were available to the authorities. 10 .     The applicants complied with the domestic authorities’ requests, by letting the officers and agents carry out the audits and producing the documents requested. Those documents were copied if they were in electronic format and in some cases they were seized; in other cases, they were left with the applicants, but sealed and stored and kept at the tax and police authorities’ disposal in order to be examined further (see paragraphs   11-36 below). JUSTIFICATION AND SCOPE OF THE MEASURES Application no. 36617/18 11 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 18 May 2018 by the director of the Tax Authority in Foggia. It indicated that the applicant company was a “medium taxpayer” with a turnover of more than 5,164,000 euros (EUR) which had not been subject to tax assessment proceedings in the previous three years, and that it had declared a low income in 2015. 12 .     Officers accessed the premises on 22 May 2018. The applicant company’s representative produced the documents requested. The officers inspected the premises and took note of the materials stored in the warehouse and the employees present on the premises. They also took copies of the employees’ identity documents. Application no. 7525/19 13 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 21 January 2019 by the director of the Tax Authority in Bari. It indicated that the applicant company was on the list of taxpayers who were to be subject to a tax assessment regarding their compliance with their tax obligations in 2015, owing to the low income declared. 14 .     Officers accessed the premises on the same day. The applicant company’s representative produced the documents requested, some of which were in electronic format. The officers inspected the premises, took note of the material which was in the company’s possession, and copied the data on its computer server. The data obtained were stored on the premises to be examined further by the authorities, and the applicant company’s representative was informed that in the event that they were altered or removed, he would be held responsible under Articles 349 to 351 of the Criminal Code, concerning the breaking of seals and the removal, deletion, destruction or damage of evidence relating to an offence, deeds, documents or other movable objects kept in a public office or by a public official or employee performing a public service. Application no. 19452/19 15.     The relevant authorisation was issued on 27 February 2019 by the head of the Tax Authority in Bari (Adriatic Division). It stated that the purpose of the measure was to identify commercial operators “at risk” in the area of e-commerce, with particular reference to the online sale of products subject to the “reverse charge” regime and transactions concluded by the applicant company between 2016 and 2019. 16 .     Officers accessed the premises on 15 March 2019. The applicant company’s representative produced the documents requested, and the officers copied the company’s general ledger ( libro giornale ) for the years 2016 and 2017 onto an electronic device. The complete record of the operations ( processo verbale ) indicates that the applicant company’s representative declared that, in his view, such access was unlawful. Application no. 52473/19 17 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 3 May 2019 by the head of the Tax Authority in Foggia. It stated that the applicant company had declared a low income and had never been subject to a general tax assessment. In particular, in 2016 it had declared an income of EUR 502 and losses of EUR   82,821. 18 .     Officers accessed various premises on 6, 13 and 15 May 2019. The complete record of the operations, dated 29 May 2019, indicated that they examined the documents acquired through the audit and identified several tax violations. It also indicated that in compliance with the relevant domestic provisions, the applicant company would be notified of those violations by means of a separate tax assessment notice or a notice imposing sanctions. Application no. 55943/19 19 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 23 April 2019 by the head of the Tax Authority in Foggia. It stated that the applicant company had not been subject to a general tax assessment in the previous five years, had reclaimed a large amount of VAT and was on the list of taxpayers to be assessed in 2019. 20 .     Officers accessed the premises on 6 June 2019. The applicant company’s representative produced the documents requested, which were stored on the premises to be examined further by the authorities. Application no. 261/20 21 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 27 November 2019 by the head of the Revenue Police in Foggia. It stated that the measure in question was an autonomous initiative by the Revenue Police aimed at obtaining evidence for a tax assessment concerning the years 2017 to 2019. 22 .     Officers accessed the premises on 27 and 28 November 2019. They examined the documents provided by the applicant company and concluded in the complete record of the operations that it had failed to fully comply with its tax obligations for the year 2017. Application no. 7991/20 23.     The relevant authorisation was issued on 19 September 2019 by the head of the Tax Authority in Foggia. It stated that the measure in question aimed to check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations in 2014 and 2016, with regard to its business relations with another company which had also been subject to an audit. 24 .     Officers accessed the premises on eighteen different dates between 24   September and 25 November 2019. When they did so, the applicant company’s representative requested that the audit be carried out in the office of the company’s accountant. The accountant surrendered the relevant documents, which were then sealed to prevent them from being altered. They were stored on the applicant company’s premises and kept at the authorities’ disposal to be examined further. Application no. 8046/20 25.     The relevant authorisation was issued on 12 September 2019 by the head of the Tax Authority in Foggia. It stated that the audit in question aimed to check the applicant company’s compliance with its tax obligations in 2014 and 2016, as the ongoing tax assessment for the year 2015 had revealed several inconsistencies and unreliable accounting. 26 .     Officers accessed the premises on 16 November 2019. When they did so, the applicant company’s representative requested that the audit be carried out in the office of the company’s accountant. The accountant surrendered the relevant documents, which were sealed to prevent them from being altered, stored on the applicant company’s premises and kept at the authorities’ disposal to be examined further. Application no. 20062/20 27 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 10 January 2020 by the director of the Tax Authority in Foggia. It stated that the audit in question aimed to check information relating to a tax credit received for the purpose of research and development – in particular, how much the company had received for the year 2017, and the applicant’s eligibility to receive such a credit for the year 2018. The audit was also being carried out owing to the fact that the applicant’s company had not been subject to general tax assessments in the previous four years. 28 .     Officers accessed the premises on 13 January 2020. The applicant surrendered the documents requested and undertook to produce others which were missing. The documents were copied by the officers and stored in a cabinet located on the premises of the applicant’s company. The applicant’s daughter, who was an employee of the company, was appointed as keeper of the documents and informed that in the event that they were altered or removed, she would be held responsible under Articles 349 to 351 of the Criminal Code. No inspection was carried out, as the officers acknowledged that there were no other employees or other relevant documents. Application no. 34827/20 29 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 8 January 2020 by the local head of the Revenue Police in Foggia. It stated that the measure in question was an autonomous initiative by the Revenue Police aimed at obtaining evidence for the tax assessment concerning the years 2017 to 2020. 30 .     Officers accessed the premises on the same day. The applicant company’s representative produced the documents requested, which were seized and taken to the local station of the Revenue Police. The officers also inspected the premises, but no other relevant documents were found. The officers took note of the identity of the employees who were on the premises. Application no. 26376/21 31 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 22 April 2021 by the local head of the Revenue Police in Foggia. It stated that the measure in question was an autonomous initiative by the Revenue Police aimed at obtaining evidence for the tax assessment concerning the years 2016 to 2021. 32 .     Officers accessed the premises on the same day. The applicant company’s representative produced the documents requested, which were sealed and stored on the applicant company’s premises and kept at the authorities’ disposal. Several electronic documents were also copied by the officers. The applicant company’s representative was appointed as keeper of the documents and informed that in the event that they were altered or removed, he would be held responsible under Articles 349 to 351 of the Criminal Code. The officers inspected the premises, but no other relevant documents were found. They also interviewed four employees and two shareholders of the company, and examined other documents. Other premises belonging to the applicant company (two sites) were also inspected. Application no. 28730/21 33 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 26 April 2021 by the head of the Revenue Police in Foggia. It stated that the measure in question was an autonomous initiative by the Revenue Police aimed at obtaining evidence for the tax assessment concerning the years 2017 to 2021. The complete record of the operations further indicated that the audit had been set in motion in the light of findings made in the context of an ongoing criminal investigation by the anti-mafia district prosecutor’s office in Bari. 34 .     Officers accessed the premises on the same day. The applicant company’s representative produced by email some of the documents requested, clarifying that he would produce the company’s books and registers as soon as they were available. The documents produced, together with others found during an inspection of other premises belonging to the applicant company, were sealed and stored in a cabinet on the applicant company’s premises. The applicant company’s representative was appointed as keeper of the documents and informed that in the event that they were altered or removed, he would be held responsible under Articles 349 to 351 of the Criminal Code. Application no. 20133/22 35 .     The relevant authorisation was issued on 28 March 2022 by the head of the Revenue Police in San Severo. It stated that the measure in question was aimed at acquiring data, information and documents concerning business relations between the applicant company and another company between 28   April 2017 and 28   March 2022. 36 .     Officers of the Revenue Police accessed the premises on 28   March 2022. The applicant company’s representative produced invoices concerning transactions with another company, and provided explanations. When asked to surrender the company’s books, the applicant’s representative replied that they were not stored on the premises which were being inspected, and undertook to produce them as soon as available. The officers acquired copies of the documents produced. RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICE DOMESTIC LAW Law no. 4 of 14 January 1929 (General provisions for the repression of violations of financial laws) 37 .     The relevant provisions of Law no. 4 of 14 January 1929 (“Law   no.   4/1929”) read as follows: Section 24 “[Persons are] notified of violations of provisions of financial laws by means of a complete record ( processo verbale ).” Section 25 “Except [where] specifically provided for in financial laws, it is not permitted to seize books provided for by the Code of Commerce and other [books] that are necessary in a commercial context for carrying out commercial and industrial activities. The previous provision does not apply in respect of violations of financial laws which amount to a criminal offence. The competent authorities can in any case obtain a copy of the books at the expense of the taxpayer [being audited], or put their signature or initials on the parts relevant for identifying the breach, including the date and stamp of the [relevant] office; [they] can also impose specific measures aimed at preventing the books from being altered or removed.” Section 35 “In order to check compliance with the requirements imposed by laws or regulations on financial matters, officers or agents of the Revenue Police are authorised to access at any time establishments open to the public and any premises designated for industrial or commercial activities, in order to carry out audits ( verificazioni ) and inquiries ( ricerche ).” [1] Constitution 38.     The relevant provision of the Constitution reads as follows: Article 14 “[A person’s] domicile is inviolable. Inspections, searches or seizures may not be carried out [in the home], except in the cases and ways prescribed by law and in accordance with the guarantees established for the protection of personal liberty. Checks and inspections for public health and safety, or for economic and fiscal purposes, shall be regulated by appropriate laws.” 39.     As consistently interpreted, the notion of “[a person’s] domicile” within the meaning of Article 14 of the Constitution must be distinguished from other notions, such as “domicile” within the meaning of the relevant criminal provisions. It includes only places which are used as a “private residence” ( privata dimora ). In particular, it includes places which are used for activities which are characteristic of private life ( svolgimento di attività caratteristiche della vita privata ). By contrast, it does not include public places and places which are open to the public, or places that, although private, are not used as “private residences”. In general, it does not include business premises and premises used for professional activities, unless they are also used as “private residences” within the meaning identified above [2] . The Code of Civil Procedure 40 .     Article 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which establishes the “aggravated liability” of a party in civil proceedings, reads as follows. “If it is ascertained that the losing party brought or defended [proceedings] in court in bad faith or with gross negligence, the judge, at the request of the other party, shall award damages which [he or she (the judge) will] also calculate proprio motu , in addition to the costs of the proceedings. ... In any case, when ruling on the costs of proceedings under Article 91, the judge, also proprio motu , may impose on the losing party an obligation to pay to the other party an amount determined on an equitable basis.” Presidential Decree no. 633 of 26 October 1972 (Imposition and regulation of value-added tax) 41 .     Under Article 51 § 2 (1) of Decree no. 633/1972, in order to exercise their function to verify compliance with tax obligations, the tax authorities are entitled to “access [premises] and carry out inspections and audits under Article   52” of the same Decree ( accessi, ispezioni e verifiche ). 42 .     The audits in question were regulated by Article 52 of Decree   no.   633/1972, the relevant paragraphs of which read as follows: Article 52 “1.     VAT offices may order that financial administration employees [are permitted] to access premises intended for commercial, agricultural, artistic or professional activities, as well as those used by non-commercial entities ..., to carry out audits of documents ( ispezioni documentali ), checks ( verificazioni ) [and] inquiries ( ricerche ), and to collect any other data deemed to be useful ( ogni altra rilevazione ritenuta utile ) for the [relevant] tax assessment and [for] combating tax evasion and other tax violations. Employees accessing [such premises] must have special authorisation indicating the purpose of such access [which is] issued by the head of the office employing them. However, authorisation from the public prosecutor’s office is required to gain access to premises that are also used as a home ( abitazione ). In any case, premises [where people] practise arts or professions must be accessed in the presence of the owner[s] ... or their representative[s]. 2.     Premises other than those indicated in the previous paragraph [private residences] may be accessed, subject to the authorisation of the public prosecutor, only in the case of serious indications of violations of the rules of the present Decree, for the purpose of finding books, records, documents, written statements and other evidence of tax violations. 3.     In any case, it is necessary to obtain the authorisation of the public prosecutor or the nearest judicial authority in order to carry out body searches, open sealed documents, bags, safes, pieces of furniture, storage rooms and similar places by force, and examine documents and information in respect of which professional secrecy is invoked while [premises are being] accessed, without prejudice to the provision enshrined in Article 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4.     Audit[s] of documents shall extend to all books, records, documents and written statements, including those which are not required to be kept and retained, that are located on the premises or are otherwise accessible by means of digital devices installed therein. 5.     [Where a taxpayer refuses to produce] books, records [or] documents, [these] may not be considered in [his or her] favour for the purposes of a tax assessment in ... administrative and judicial proceedings. A declaration that the books, records, documents and written statements are not in the possession of the taxpayer, or the withholding [of these documents] from an audit, shall be taken as equating to a refusal to submit [such documents]. 6.     A complete record must be made in relation to each [occasion when premises are] accessed, describing the inspection and collection of data, as well as the requests made to the taxpayer or his or her representative and the answers received. The complete record must be signed by the taxpayer or his or her representative or state the reason why it is not signed. The taxpayer has the right to receive a copy. 7.     Documents and records may be seized only if it is not possible to reproduce them or their content in the complete record, or if the content of the complete record is not signed or its content is disputed. Books and records may not be seized; the [officers implementing the measures] may make copies or [make copies of] extracts or have others make copies or [make copies of] extracts, may put their signature or initials in the relevant parts together with the date and official stamp, and may give appropriate warnings to prevent the books and records from being altered or removed. ...” 43 .     Under Article 55 § 2 (1), if the taxpayer, when requested to do so, omits to produce the documents, records and books necessary for the tax assessment, the Tax Authority is entitled to resort to presumptions based on the data and items otherwise collected in order to assess the tax owed. 44 .     Article 57 establishes the time-limits for issuing a tax assessment notice finding that a taxpayer has failed to comply with the relevant tax obligations in a specific fiscal year. In its current formulation, the first paragraph of that Article provides that the taxpayer must be notified of an assessment by 31 December of the fifth year following the year in which the relevant tax return was filed. In accordance with the second paragraph, where the taxpayer has completely omitted to file a return, he or she may be notified of the tax assessment by 31 December of the seventh year following the year in which the return should have been filed [3] . 45 .     Under Article 66, officers of the Tax Authority and the Revenue Police are bound by professional secrecy with regard to the data and information acquired through exercising their functions. Presidential Decree no. 600 of 29 September 1973 (Common provisions concerning the assessment of income tax) 46 .     Under Article 32 § 1 (1) of Decree no. 600/1973, in order to exercise their function to verify compliance with tax obligations, the tax authorities are entitled to “access [premises] and carry out inspections and audits under Article   33 [of the same Decree]”. 47 .     Article 33 § 1 of Decree no. 600/1973 provides that access to premises, inspections and audits in the context of income tax assessments are regulated by Article 52 of Decree no. 633/1973 (see paragraph 42 above). The fourth paragraph provides that documents, records and books which are requested by the authorities but not produced by a taxpayer cannot be considered in the taxpayer’s favour in subsequent administrative and judicial proceedings. 48 .     Under Article 39 § 2 (c), if the taxpayer omits to produce documents, records and books when requested to do so, the Tax Authority is entitled to resort to presumptions based on data which are otherwise available in order to determine the income in relation to which tax obligations must be assessed. 49 .     Article 43 establishes the time-limits for concluding proceedings relating to income tax assessment (see paragraph 44 above). 50 .     Article 68 reiterates that administrative tax officers and revenue police officers have a duty of professional secrecy (see paragraph 45 above). Legislative Decree no. 546 of 31 December 1992 (Provisions concerning proceedings before tax courts) 51 .     Article 19 of Decree no. 546/1992, as in force at the material time, includes an exhaustive list of official documents that can be challenged before the tax courts. Its relevant parts read as follows: Article 19: Acts [official documents] that can be challenged and the subject of the complaint “1.     Complaints [to the tax courts] can be lodged against: (a)     a tax assessment notice; (b)     a tax liquidation notice; (c)     an order imposing sanctions; (d)     a tax collection notice; ... (i)     any other act which the law expressly states can be challenged. ... 2.     Acts other than those expressly provided for cannot be challenged. Any act that can be challenged may be challenged solely on the basis of its own irregularities ...” Legislative Decree no. 471 of 18 December 1997 (The reform of non ‑ criminal tax sanctions in the field of direct taxes, value ‑ added tax and the collection of taxes) 52 .     Where a taxpayer refuses to produce the documents requested by the authorities when they are accessing premises and carrying out inspections and audits, the sanction provided for by Article 9 of Decree no. 471/1997 is imposed on him or her. That provision reads as follows: Article 9: Violation of bookkeeping obligations “1.     Any person who does not keep or retain, in accordance with the relevant duties, the accounting records, documents and books required by the relevant laws on direct taxes and value-added tax, or the accounting records, documents and books which are required to be kept and retained under other tax provisions, shall be [given] an administrative fine of EUR 1,000 to EUR 8,000. [4] 2.     The sanction provided for in the first paragraph of this provision shall also be imposed on [persons] who, while [the authorities] are accessing [premises] in the context of an assessment of direct taxes and value-added tax, refuse to produce or declare that they do not possess, or in any case withhold from the audit and check, documents, books and accounting records which may not be mandatory [but] certainly exist. ...” Law no. 212 of 27 July 2000 (the Act on the Taxpayer’s Rights) 53 .     The relevant provisions of Law no. 212/2000 read as follows: Section 12: Rights and guarantees of the taxpayer subject to tax audits “1.     All access to premises [used] for commercial, industrial, agricultural, artistic or professional activities, and audits and tax checks on [those] premises, shall be ... on the basis of the actual needs of an investigation and on-site audit. Save for exceptional and urgent cases which are adequately documented, [those measures] shall be implemented during ordinary business hours and in such a manner as to cause the least possible disruption to the conduct of such activities and the business or professional relations of the taxpayer. 2.     When an audit is initiated, the taxpayer has the right to be informed of the reasons justifying the audit and its scope, of [his or her] right to be assisted by a professional [who is] qualified to appear before the tax courts, and of [his or her] rights and obligations during audits. 3.     At the request of the taxpayer, administrative and accounting documents may be examined in the office of the auditors or that of the professional who assists or represents the taxpayer. 4.     The observations and remarks of the taxpayer and the professional who may assist [him or her] shall be noted in the [record] of the audit operations. ... 6.     If the taxpayer believes that the auditors are proceeding in a manner that is not in accordance with the law, [he or she] may also appeal to the Taxpayer’s Guarantor, under the provisions of section 13 ...”   Section 13: Taxpayer’s Guarantor “1.     A Taxpayer’s Guarantor is established at each directorate of revenues in the regions and autonomous provinces. 2.     The Taxpayer’s Guarantor, operating in full autonomy, is an [individual person acting as a] body [who is] chosen and appointed by the president of the regional tax court or its detached section in whose district the regional directorate of the tax authority is based ... 6.     The Taxpayer’s Guarantor addresses requests for documents or clarifications to the competent offices, [and does so] also on the basis of reports submitted in writing by the taxpayer or any other interested party who complains of malfunctions, irregularities, incorrectness, abnormal or unreasonable administrative practices, or any other behaviour likely to undermine the relationship of trust between citizens and the financial administration. [The competent offices] respond within thirty days, and [this] activates the self-correction procedures ( autotutela ) in respect of administrative assessments or collection notices of which the taxpayer has been notified. The Taxpayer’s Guarantor communicates the outcome of the activity carried out to the regional or district directorates [of the tax authorities] or to the area headquarters of the Revenue Police, as well as to supervisory bodies, informing the person who reported [the irregularity]. 7.     The Taxpayer’s Guarantor makes recommendations to tax office managers to protect the taxpayer and organise services in the best way. ...” The power of self-correction ( autotutela ) 54.     As part of its power of “self-correction” ( autotutela ), a public administrative body can annul or revoke decisions that have already been made, without the intervention of a judicial authority. DOMESTIC PRACTICE Guidelines of the Ministry of Economy and Finance concerning tax policy objectives 55.     The Ministry of Economy and Finance has issued and published on its website guidance documents aimed at tax policy objectives. These documents are addressed to all bodies involved in revenue administration (the Finance Department of the Ministry, the Tax Authority, the Revenue Police) and outline operational guidelines aimed at improving services for taxpayers, promoting voluntary compliance with tax obligations, and preventing and combating tax evasion and avoidance. 2016-2018 Guidelines 56 .     Paragraph 2 of the 2016-2018 Guidelines, dated 22 December 2015, provided that in the context of activities aimed at combating tax evasion and avoidance, the tax authorities had to “reduce intrusive checks” by “further developing an analysis of the relevant risks”, including through the use of automated tools, such as databases. 2018-2020 Guidelines 57 .     Point (f) of the General Criteria of the 2018-2020 Guidelines, dated 5   December 2017, set the following objective: the further implementation of computerised and automated systems enhancing the effectiveness of checks through the efficient use of databases whose ability to function effectively with other systems would be improved. Circular no. 4/E of the Tax Authority of 7 May 2021 58 .     Circular no. 4/E of the Tax Authority of 7 May 2021 included “Operational guidelines on the prevention of and fight against tax evasion, and on activities related to tax disputes, advice and services for taxpayers”. In Chapter I, the Circular gave instructions concerning the selection of small, medium and large businesses and individual taxpayers to be subjected to remote auditing and on-site audits. In general, it stated that while the situation generated by the COVID-19 pandemic should be taken into account, priority should be given to checking taxpayers who demonstrated a higher risk of non ‑ compliance, or who had behaved in an uncooperative and non ‑ transparent way in the past. 59 .     Similar guidelines were reiterated in Circular no. 21/E of the Tax Authority of 20 June 2022, following the COVID-19 pandemic. DOMESTIC CASE-LAW Case-law on the conditions for authorising access and inspections and the ex ante review of those measures 60 .     According to the case-law of the Court of Cassation, authorisation issued by a head of the revenue service or a public prosecutor which permits access to business premises and premises used for professional activities that are not private residences does not have to be reasoned, as the relevant legal provisions do not require specific conditions for the issue of such