The Supreme Court has established that, in the event of a partial or total denial of a refund, the taxpayer may not submit a new refund request.
Taxpayers, when determining their taxes, may generate a favorable balance (tax credit), which they can either request as a refund or apply through offsetting—provided it is applied against a tax liability of the same type and relates to the same tax.
When a taxpayer chooses to request a refund, they must comply with the requirements outlined in the procedure files published in Annex 1-A of the Miscellaneous Tax Resolution. These files specify the documentation that must be submitted along with the application, enabling the tax authority to verify the validity of the favorable balance and proceed with the corresponding deposit.
However, the tax authority may reject the refund request, either partially or entirely. That is, the favorable balance determined or «verified» by the taxpayer may not match the amount claimed, resulting in a lower refund or, in some cases, a complete denial.
Until July 18, 2025, taxpayers facing this situation were allowed to submit a new refund request, correcting any inconsistencies identified in the previous application, in order to recover the full or remaining amount of the favorable balance.
According to this precedent, when the tax authority issues a negative resolution on a refund request, the taxpayer had the option to file a new request, correcting the deficiencies that led to the denial, without being required to pursue legal remedies such as the revocation appeal before the authority or the nullity lawsuit before the Federal Administrative Justice Court (TFJA)
Revocation Appeal
Article 120 of the Federal Fiscal Code (CFF) establishes that filing a revocation appeal is optional. Therefore, the taxpayer may decide whether to challenge the resolution before the same authority prior to initiating a judicial proceeding.
This appeal must be filed within 30 days from the date the resolution is considered notified through the tax mailbox (buzón tributario), and the taxpayer must have a valid electronic signature (e.firma) to do so.
However, as of July 11, 2025, this criterion was overridden by jurisprudence registration number 2030763, which states that it is no longer permissible for taxpayers to submit a new refund request correcting inconsistencies without first challenging the denial. This is because the authority has already issued a resolution, and such resolution can only be modified through a judicial or administrative ruling, which can only be obtained by filing a formal legal challenge.
This means that the taxpayer must exhaust legal remedies (such as a revocation appeal or nullity lawsuit) instead of submitting a new refund request. Failing to do so would undermine the principle of legal certainty.