The 8th Panel of the Federal Regional Court of the 1st Region decided to uphold the decision that rejected the Union's objections to the execution of a judicial executive title (regarding the repetition of undue contributions to the Social Integration Program — PIS), on the grounds that the refund of the amounts paid in excess as the aforementioned tax by the company's branch is also due.
In the appeal, the Union requested the exclusion of the credit in favor of the subsidiary, claiming that only the parent company was a party to the execution.
When analyzing the case, the rapporteur, federal judge Novély Vilanova, stated that the amounts receivable from undue payments in the form of taxes belong to the company as a whole, so that the parent company can discuss the legal-tax relationship, claim restitution or compensation for undue payments from its subsidiaries.
In his vote, the judge stated that the term “branch” represents a depersonalized entity, without the capacity to be a party or to be in court. “The precedents of the STJ that require the express mention of the name of the branch and CNPJ in the initial petition of the tax information action are not binding,” he explained.
Finally, the rapporteur stated that, if there is no “autonomy” of the branch to satisfy the tax credit in tax enforcement, there is no justification for preventing the parent company from requesting recovery of undue payment from its branch.
Source: https://www.conjur.com.br/2021-set-13/matriz-pedir-restituicao-ou-compensacao-indebitos-filiais