Issue of objective or subjective legal nature of shares and partners share was always place of difference for Lawyers. Legal provisions in this regard have acted insufficient (poor). This caused the idea of some Lawyers is that shares are considered among the subjective And accordingly, Contract transfer them to see for Transfer of debt. The purpose of this study is to disambiguation the nature of shares. Justifying of Taxation on shares from the perspective of subjective nature of them is ambiguous. Incoming is Taxation source due of business in its economic meaning (arts 17, 34, 119 to 123, 143 and repeated 143 of direct Taxes act) that’ s the meaning Makes a need to transfer the shares as an independent and integrated property. Studies library and taking notes from the sources, the main basis of this research is. The involvement of the subject of the study with issues such as Taxation in the Tax authorities has led to field researches by contacting these bodies and Taxpayers. As a result; Topics mentioned Ownership interest objective explanation of the relationship between share and shareholder are known. Transfer of due not arising to actual acquire of income. Therefore, Taxation on stock is not possible except in the form of a transfer of an objective property.

Tax , as the most initial and most important public revenue , principally plays an important role in providing public expenses and for this purpose, it enjoys an extraordinarily higher place for all states in the world.In this way in Tax Laws that are currently enforced in all states including Iran, special rights and powers have been granted to Tax organization in order to allow it to carry out fully well it’s tasks and liabilities in this enterprise. These rights and powers are called as ‘Tax authority exercise’ Nevertheless, today emphases are more laid on the motivated involvement and co-operations from Tax payers than exercising any authorities and rights of these kinds. the example of which is already followed by Iranian Tax Law outhorities.Farther consideration of the case as mentioned above show that Tax is counted as one unique manifestation of a state’s sovereignty and is best mixed with its authoritative continued existence.

The burden of proof in disputes between Taxpayer and Tax office respecting the income Tax is governed by special legal rules corresponding with the special character of Tax transactions on the basis of general rule of proving in the legal system. On the one hand, general rules of proving and some Principles like the no obligation principle constitute the bases of burden of proof rules in the income Tax and on the other hand, special position of Taxpayer and the role of his Tax return in the documenting and evidencing Tax transactions as well as sovereign and formal position of Tax office in assessment of income Tax create special phenomena respecting burden of proof of factual transaction by Taxpayer or Tax office. This research is to analyse and propose a theory on purden of proof in income Tax disputes on the basis of general rules of evidence and special rules and phenomena of Tax Law. The research method of this article is based on clarifying, analyzing and legal concluding on the basis of the relevant theorical foundations, general legal Principles, special Tax rules, relevant Laws and regulations, judicial practices and awards as well as findings of comparative Law research. The research is to theorize for initiating the Principles, rules for legal questions of burden of proof in the income Tax cases.

Lawyers as a free profession ought to pay their Tax annually and before 1956 had not any obligation to pay Tax in part payment by buying timber and attaching it on their act of attorneys or court’ s process verbal. After stipulating this obligation, the question of nonobservant of this duty and its sanction posed on Lawyer’ s attorney power. Law of Direct Tax, 1988, article 103 of that Law added a phrase to its prior Laws that the attorney will not accepted in courts ‘ ’ under Civil Procedure Rules” and referred the sanction to our Law of Civil Procedure but, before this year as after that, we see many conflicts between consultative views and judgments. Some courts have held that nonpayment of on account payment is equivalent to non-representation and some others have held that the act of action is incomplete and the other courts have held that the representation is not exist but Lawyer’ s act is admissible. In this article we have essayed to analyze and finding a solution about the nonobservance of duty of in part payment.

The main reason for focusing on value added Tax (VAT) is expanding Tax base and increasing Tax revenues. Regarding the implementation of VAT Act initiated in October 2008, this paper attempts to estimate Tax revenue resulting from this Act, which is based on input ! output table and production method.Based on the results of this research, VAT base according to the Act is about 44 percent of GDP; with regard to the rate of 1.5 percent, potential VAT revenue will be 0.67 percent of GDP.Results of this study show that the full implementation of VAT act with rate of 1.5 percent will not have significant effect on reducing the operating budget deficit. The VAT rate should be increased in order to makeup such a deficit.

One important aspect of Tax treaties is the possibility for referring to all the mechanisms available in domestic Law of contracting states along with the International dispute Settlement procedures. A Taxpayer can take advantage of the international mutual agreement procedure and the methods envisaged in this regard by international organizations. In this article we have tried to analyze the methods of resolving Tax disputes as proposed by international organizations within such arrangements and organizations as Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), World Trade Organization (WTO), European: : : : union: : : : (EU), United Nations (UN) and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). These organizations have similar and sometimes different approaches to resolving Tax disputes. One of these methods is Tax Proceeding or international Tax arbitration, which is mainly, follows a disagreement resulting from the referral of the dispute to competent authorities of contracting states.

One of the main sources of government revenue are Taxes that are collected under different names. Tax revenues, constitute a considerable part of the state budget. In a way, it can be said that the activities of the government and its continuation depend on the collection of Taxes. In this regard, in the Tax Law of some countries, including Iran and the United Kingdom, to provide and guarantee Taxes, extensive and unique powers and authority are given to the Tax system. By resorting to them, it can collect Taxes in the fastest time and in the most appropriate way. These executive guarantees are divided in the form of administrative, criminal and civil enforcement guarantees. The latest guarantee of performances is the discussion of criminalization in the amendment of the Direct Taxes Law on 4/31/2015, which will have a significant impact on the implementation of the policies of the Tax organization. Of course, it goes without saying that the guarantee of administrative execution has a higher economic efficiency than other guarantees of performances, and in contrast to the guarantee of civil and criminal execution, it is less desirable. Also, with the full implementation of the comprehensive Tax plan and the use of new methods of Taxation, along with factors such as enriching the Tax culture and increasing the obedience of Taxpayers and encouraging them to self-declare through tools such as increasing incentives and social services and so on. We expect to see more and more growth and development of the country in the economic field.

The developments of naval technologies have combined modern naval wars. Nowadays, naval warfare means the use of tactics and the conduct of military operations on, below, or above the sea. An exemplar of a tactical tool is the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in naval operations. Undoubtedly, the use of UAVs in naval conflict can raise a number of issues related to the Law of naval warfare. The lack of specific treaties on their use at the sea has caused a legal gap and some ambiguities. Therefore, this paper aims to determine whether UAVs can be used within the framework of the rules governing the Law of naval warfare and the basic Principles of the humanitarian Law. This paper also aims to analyze the capacity of the existing rules to employ UAVs in the naval warfare. For this purpose, a descriptive analytical research method was used along with a desk method for data collection. According to the research findings, international treaties and customary Laws, especially the humanitarian Law, are not indifferent to the legal status of UAVs, despite the air and missile war guidelines as well as the Sun Guidelines in particular. They are not binding documents. In fact, they have amended and revised the Law of naval warfare in accordance with the rules of the humanitarian Law. Hence, they can be applied to UAVs.