Evulation of witness statements with in the framework of the right to a fair trial in tax jurisdiction

According to the regulation in Article 36 of the second part of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey titled "Fundamental Rights and Duties"; "Everyone has the right to claim and defend themselves as a plaintiff or defendant before the judicial authorities and to a fair trial by making use of legitimate means and methods." As can be understood from the relevant provision, the right to proof is guaranteed by the Constitution. The tools used in exercising the right to proof are constituted by evidence. The concept of evidence in tax litigation is in a position that should be interpreted autonomously compared to other branches of justice in terms of both its principles and applicability. For this reason, in our study, we have tried to clarify the concept of evidence within the scope of tax law more clearly by mentioning evidence in other branches of justice. According to Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, "Everyone has the right to have his case heard fairly, publicly and within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial court established by law, which will decide on the disputes concerning his civil rights and obligations or on the merits of the criminal charges brought against him." Both the Convention and the European Court of Human Rights determine a path independent of domestic remedies and in line with their own criteria when evaluating the right to a fair trial. Therefore, the essence of the assessment made in terms of tax jurisdiction is determined under different conditions. Indeed, the criteria for the applicability of witness evidence, which is quite controversial in practice, in tax law should be evaluated separately in terms of the right to a fair trial. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the types of evidence formed during the trial in light of the right to a fair trial in terms of the Turkish tax jurisdiction and to examine in detail the specific structure of witness evidence in line with the deficiencies in practice. As a result of the assessment, it was concluded that the evidence system of tax law also has an autonomous structure compared to other branches of jurisdiction. Indeed, there is no regulation in tax law regarding certain evidence that is ruled in detail in other branches of jurisdiction. In practice, the expectation for a comprehensive regulation has been determined by completing the deficiencies. Keywords: Tax, Tax Disputes, Proof and Evidence, Types of Evidence, Witness Evidence in Turkish Tax Jurisdiction, Right to a Fair Trial, European Court of Human Right.