Res judicata and the enforcement of economic administrative resolutions. Does the principle of legal certainty and good administration exist?

Abstract

The automatism to which the Tax Administration has accustomed us, and the obscurity of its regulations, leads tax matters in most cases to become chronic. A paradigm of this is Judgment number 179/2023, of July 21, of the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla y León, where it recognizes a legal gap in Article 36 of the Law of Contentious-Administrative Jurisdiction, regarding the enforcement of resolutions favourable to the taxpayer of the Economic-Administrative Courts, when these are delayed, so delayed that even when the judicial process (contentious-administrative) that judged the presumed resolution has already concluded. Does res judicata exist? Which does prevail, Superior Court of Justice judgment over the presumed act, or the subsequent resolution of the competent Economic-Administrative Court on this express act? Can the Administration use administrative silence to its own interest? Is there any action-petition identity on the dismissive resolution against the presumed act, and the subsequent express resolution favourable to the taxpayer?