Legal Remedies And The Official Appeal Process For Property Tax Values 30 July 2025

Following the enactment of Law No. 4751 in 2002, which amended the Tax Procedure Law, the Property Tax Law, and the Fees Law, the declaration-based system for determining the property tax base was abolished, and the tariff and assesment procedure implemented by administrative authorities was adopted. Property taxpayers are now only required to notify the relevant municipality upon the occurrence of certain situations listed under Article 33 of the Property Tax Law No. 1319, which may lead to a change in the tax assessment value. Apart from this, taxpayers have no formal obligations and are only involved in the process during the payment of the tax.
(Dr. Abdullah ARIKAN, Emlak Vergisi Uygulamasından Kaynaklanan Uyuşmazlıkların Yargısal Çözümünde Karşılaşılan Bazı Hukuki Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri, TBB Dergisi 2024 (174), pp. 166-167.)
 

Pursuant to the repeated Article 49 of the Tax Procedure Law, the square meter unit values of land and plots are determined by valuation commissions every four years in order to calculate the tax amounts to be assessed. In this context the valuation commissions, in accordance with Article 29/a of the Property Tax Law, determine the unit value of land by taking into account the region where the property is located and the type of land. The assessed values will be applicable for the year following the date of the assessment. For subsequent years, the tax assessment value will be recalculated each year by increasing the previous year's value by half of the revaluation rate.

"The tax assessment value is determined each year, starting from the year following the commencement of the taxpayer's liability, by increasing the previous year's tax assesment value by half of the revaluation rate determined for the same year in accordance with the provisions of Tax Procedure Law No. 213." (Article 29/2 of the Property Tax Law)
 

Although a limiting maximum cap was introduced for the unit values assessed for the years 2017-2018 under Provisional Article 23 of the Property Tax Law, no such regulation has been established for the valuation commission decisions of the years 2021 and 2025. The principles concerning the establishment, duties, and powers of the valuation commission in determining the minimum unit assessment values for land are regulated under Articles 72 and subsequent provisions of the Tax Procedure Law.
 

b. Regarding the Internal Circular No. 2025/1 of the Property Tax Law
 

According to the Internal Circular of the Property Tax Law, numbered 82673428-175.99[6650-150]-23684 and serial number 2025/1, it is stipulated that the determination of the minimum square meter unit assessment values for land and plots, as well as the notification of the relevant decisions to interested parties, must be completed by the end of the business hours on June 30, 2025, in accordance with the rule that the decision must be finalized at least six months prior to the date on which the assessment and accrual transactions will be carried out.
 

c. Legal Remedy Against the Valuation Commission Decisions Pursuant to Repeated Article 49
 

The provision of repeated Article 49/b-3 of the Tax Procedure Law, which stipulates that only the offices, institutions, organizations, and relevant neighborhood and village headmen to whom the decision of the valuation commission is notified may file a lawsuit, thereby preventing property tax taxpayers from filing suit, was annulled by the Constitutional Court with Decision No. 2011/38 (Case No. 2012/89) dated May 31, 2012. This provision was deemed to violate the principle of the rule of law and the right to legal remedy. Consequently, the ruling opened the way for those whose interests are adversely affected by the valuation commission decisions and therefore, property taxpayers, to file lawsuits against assessment commission decisions.
 

d. Time Limit for Filing a Lawsuit
 

The time limit for filing a lawsuit for property taxpayers is the date of notification to the taxpayers themselves, not the notification to the neighborhood headmen, is taken as the starting point. Prior to the Constitutional Court's annulment decision No. 2011/38 (Case No. 2012/89) dated May 31, 2012; the offices, institutions, organizations, and relevant neighborhood and village headmen to whom the valuation commission decision was notified were entitled to file a lawsuit within 15 days from the date of notification pursuant to repeated Article 49. However, after the annulment decision, no specific regulation regarding the time limit for filing a lawsuit was introduced. Therefore, as accepted in the Council of State precedents, the general time limit for filing a lawsuit stipulated in Article 7 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPL) applies. Within this framework, the annulment lawsuit must be filed within 30 days from the date the valuation commission's decision is notified to the taxpayers.
 

"...Although the annulment decision essentially pertains to who is entitled to file a lawsuit against the decisions of the valuation commission, since the sentence that included the time limit for filing a lawsuit was entirely annulled, ... the legal time limit for filing lawsuits set out in Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law must be applied in lawsuits filed against the decisions of the valuation commission." (Council of State, 9th Chamber, Case No. 2016/15550, Decision No. 2016/5897, dated 09.06.2016)
 

Additionally, it should be noted that regional administrative, administrative, and tax courts suspend their operations each year from July 20th to August 31st, with the judicial term resuming on September 1th. In this context, if the last day of the lawsuit filing period falls within the suspension period, the deadline is considered to be extended by seven days starting from the day following the end of the recess. Therefore, if the final day of the 30-day period for filing a lawsuit-beginning from the date the decision is notified to the property taxpayer-falls between July 20th and August 31st, the deadline is extended until September 7th. However, administrative judicial authorities located outside the provincial centers where the regional administrative courts are based, and where there is only one administrative or one tax court, are not subject to this rule.
 

However, according to repeated Article 49/b-4, which states that "Finalized minimum unit values for land and plots shall be announced by being posted in a suitable place at the relevant municipalities and neighborhood headmen's offices from the beginning of the year in which assessment and accrual are made until the end of May" the end of the year in which the assessment is made is considered the definitive timeframe for filing a lawsuit. In other words, if a person whose interests are adversely affected by the decision of the valuation commission learns of the decision at a later date, and the end of the 30-day period calculated from the date of learning falls after the last day of the year in which the valuation was made, the the timeframe for filing a lawsuit will end not after the 30 days but at the end of that valuation year.
 

"As a result of the examination carried out in this context, considering the fact that there is no procedure adopted in the law for the notification of the valuation commission decisions to the taxpayers,it must be accepted that taxpayers may file a lawsuit against the valuation commission's decision determining the minimum unit value of land and plots for property tax purposes within the general 30-day period starting from the date they become aware of the decision, and at the latest by the last day of the year in which the decision was made. It was ruled that no legal action may be initiated after that date."
(Council of State, Tax Law Chambers Joint Assembly, Case No. 2022/14, Decision No. 2023/2, dated 15.02.2023)
 

e. Authorized and Competent Court
 

In this context, the authorized and competent court for lawsuits to be filed is the tax court located in the jurisdiction where the valuation was conducted, in accordance with the Law No. 2576 on the Establishment and Jurisdiction of Regional Administrative Courts, Administrative Courts, and Tax Courts.
 

f. Expert Examination and Court Decision
 

As a result of annulment lawsuits filed by those whose interests are adversely affected by the valuation commission's decision, the tax court may decide to annul the decision, partially annul it, or reject the annulment request. In the event that the valuation commission's decision is annulled, everyone whose interests were affected by that decision will benefit from the court's ruling. If the tax court decides in favor of the claimant-either fully or partially-this ruling will be limited solely to the annulment (or partial annulment); the court cannot itself determine a unit value. Courts' jurisdiction is limited to legal review, and courts prohibited from issuing decisions that constitute an administrative act.
 

"The jurisdiction of the administrative judiciary is limited to the review of the legality of administrative acts and actions. Administrative courts may not conduct a review of expediency and may not render judgments that restrict the performance of executive functions in accordance with the forms and principles set out in laws and Presidential Decrees, that constitute administrative acts or actions, or that eliminate the discretionary power of the administration." (Article 2/2 of the Administrative Procedure Law)
 

However, the court's determination of value through an expert examination is a consequence of its duty to conduct an ex officio investigation and to clarify the case, and therefore cannot be regarded as issuing a decision that constitutes an administrative act.
 

"...Pursuant to paragraph (1) of Article 20, which regulates the principle of ex officio investigation, administrative judicial authorities are authorized and obligated to conduct all necessary examinations and investigations to resolve the legal dispute and to determine whether the factual circumstances asserted in the claims and defenses reflect the truth... Since benefiting from a tax deduction requires that invoices and similar documents reflect the actual situation, determining through the specified judicial examination whether the invoices are based on an actual delivery of goods or performance of services is also a requirement of Article 3 of the Tax Procedure Law, which aims to reveal the true nature of the taxable event. Within this framework, judicial review conducted by administrative courts based on the principle of ex officio investigation cannot be regarded as the judiciary substituting the administration or performing an administrative act." (Council of State, Tax Law Chambers Joint Assembly, Case No. 2019/1853, Decision No. 2020/291, dated 11.03.2020)