Sicilian tax court cancels ADM betting-tax assessment against Alcamo company

Sicily's second-instance tax court upheld an appeal by a company based in Alcamo, according to Kogem. The court fully cancelled an assessment issued by ADM on single betting tax. The amount involved was hundreds of thousands of euros. The decision reversed the first-instance judgment.

Kogem relayed the outcome in an analysis signed by lawyer Valentina Castellucci of the Palermo Bar. Castellucci is a professional partner of Kogem and handled the defence.

On the criminal side, the Trapani court had definitively acquitted the defendant of illegal collection of bets. Castellucci had also defended the case in those proceedings. According to the report, the issue is the relationship between a final criminal judgment and a tax claim.

The defence relied on article 21-bis of Legislative Decree 74/2000, introduced by Legislative Decree 87/2024 and read in light of Constitutional Court ruling 50/2026. Castellucci said the provision gives binding force in tax proceedings to an irrevocable criminal acquittal issued after a trial. This applies where the judgment concerns the same person and the same material facts, and the acquittal is because the act did not occur or the defendant did not commit it. Where the acquittal is because the act did not occur, the third paragraph extends the effects to entities and companies in whose interest the representative or director acted, under the stated conditions.

The Constitutional Court filed ruling 50 on 13 April 2026, recognising the provision as serving guarantee and simplification purposes. Where a claim rests on legal presumptions typical of tax law, the criminal judgment binds only if the acquittal comes from a positive finding that the act did not exist. Where the acquittal rests only on the evidence being unusable in the criminal trial, the tax judge must check whether it can be used in the tax case.

Castellucci stressed that a criminal acquittal does not automatically cancel every tax claim. She said the reasoning of the judgment, the overlap of material facts and compliance with the legal conditions must be examined. According to the analysis, the case shows betting companies the need for real coordination between criminal and tax defence.