The principle of IRC and Duke of Westminster No. 1 of 1936 is that a person can manage their financial situation and should pay lower tax. If he succeeds, he will not be punished by tax laws. Later, when the court decided to introduce the Ramsey principle to enforce taxpayer remedies, this became moot. Tax evasion arises from tax planning, through which the managers of a company check the means and measures to adopt to reduce the tax burden and adopt the correct management of financial documents. It is a fair attitude, in which avoid generating facts that overburden the tax burden of this legal entity by choosing less costly facts. Say no to plagiarism. Get a Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get an Original EssayDoctrinalally, tax evasion can result from the law itself or from loopholes and loopholes in the law. In this sense, elision arises from the law when the normative text provides a means of granting advantages, as is the case with tax incentives. Elision will be the result of loopholes and loopholes, in turn, when the taxpayer conducts his business in a way that reduces the tax burden. This is the case for companies which transfer their factories to municipalities benefiting from a lower ISSQN rate (tax on services of all kinds), in order to pay less taxes. Tax planning, and therefore tax evasion, therefore deserves to be analyzed by each company as a legal means of reducing its burden and increasing its profit. Tax evasion, on the other hand, is a bad attitude or, at least, an administrative offense. This is the non-payment of taxes, even when the taxable event has already been verified. Avoidance can occur by omitting information or providing false declarations to agricultural authorities; for falsification or falsification of duplicates, invoices and other taxable transaction documents, as well as false declarations of rents, property or facts. Finally, it involves falsification or falsification of documents and declarations aimed at reducing or avoiding the tax burden. An example of tax evasion is when a contractor fails to report a sale or service rendered in order to avoid tax incidence. This practice is therefore illegal, once the generating event has been verified, the sale of the good or the provision of a service must be collected and collected the taxes due. Escape and avoidance differ depending on when they occur. In this sense, in tax evasion, there is a way to avoid the taxable event (sale of property) which would represent a significant charge. In the event of tax evasion, the occurrence of the generating event (sale of the property) is permitted and means are sought to falsify or omit information in order to avoid or reduce the tax impact. Thus, in the event of tax evasion, a company leaves a municipality to pay the ISSQN at a lower rate. In terms of tax evasion, the company remains in the same municipality but declares certain services rendered lower than actual to pay a lower amount under ISSQN. Finally, we can emphasize that they differ because elision is a legal method and evasion an illicit method, subject to a tax administrative procedure. In this way, it becomes more attractive for any business to look for lawful ways to reduce its tax burden through proper tax planning. Indeed, if the company promotes tax evasion, in addition to inappropriate and harmful behavior for the country, it may be sentenced to heavy fines resulting from tax proceedings. Tax elimination refers to behavior.