Rodriguez D'andrea, Angeles M v. Departamento De Hacienda De Puerto Rico, KLAN202400835

Ángeles M. Rodríguez D’andrea filed suit seeking a tax refund from the Puerto Rico Department of Hacienda, arising from a payment received in 1998 as part of a voluntary termination agreement, a portion of which she claimed was improperly taxed.
She originally claimed a refund in her 2003 tax return for a portion of the payment retained as income tax, but the Department of Hacienda issued a final deficiency notice requiring additional payment, which she paid.
In 2010, after the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico held, in Orsini García v. Srio. de Hacienda, that such severance payments were not taxable, Rodríguez D’andrea sought a full refund and initiated judicial proceedings in 2023 after her administrative claim was denied in August of that year.
The trial court dismissed her complaint as barred by res judicata (issue preclusion), holding that the administrative determination had become final before the Orsini García decision, and the ruling was not retroactive.
Rodríguez D’andrea appealed, arguing multiple errors regarding due process, timeliness, application of res judicata, and the retroactive effect of Orsini García. The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals dismissed her appeal as untimely, finding it was filed beyond the 30-day jurisdictional deadline established for tax refund appeals.

Issue	Rodríguez D’andrea’s Argument	Hacienda’s Argument	Held
Whether res judicata barred her tax refund claim	Res judicata does not apply; admin decision was void	Res judicata applies; admin determination was final in 2008	Res judicata applies; admin determination final
Due process and adequacy of administrative notice	Due process was violated; notice lacked crucial info	Process was proper; determination was final and binding	Not addressed on merits (appeal dismissed as late)
Opportunity to litigate claim	She lacked a fair opportunity to litigate administratively	Administrative processes were exhausted and final	Not addressed on merits (appeal dismissed as late)
Timeliness and applicable appeal deadline	Rule affording longer time for state as party should apply	Tax code’s 30-day jurisdictional deadline governs	Appeal untimely under 30-day deadline

Orsini García v. Srio. de Hacienda, 177 DPR 596 (P.R. 2009) (held that certain employment termination payments are not taxable and set limits on the retroactive application of tax rulings)
Pueblo v. Ríos Nieves, 209 DPR 264 (P.R. 2022) (clarifies that appellate courts lack jurisdiction to hear untimely appeals)
Com. Electoral PPD v. Com. Electoral PNP, 205 DPR 559 (P.R. 2020) (special statutes override general statutes regarding procedural deadlines)