PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM WAJIB PAJAK ATAS PENGUASAAN TANAH DAN BANGUNAN YANG BERKELANJUTAN DALAM SENGKETA KEPEMILIKAN TANAH

Leli Novianti

doi:10.52496/bayaniV.6I.1pp137-173

Penulis

Leli Novianti UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52496/bayaniV.6I.1pp137-173

Kata Kunci:

Taxpayer, SPPT PBB, Land Possession, Certificate of Ownership, Legal Protection

Abstrak

This article examines the legal protection of taxpayers who continuously and physically possess land and buildings in land ownership disputes, particularly where such possession is supported by a Tax Due Notice for Land and Building Tax (SPPT PBB), while another party holds a Certificate of Ownership (Sertifikat Hak Milik/SHM) over the same property. This issue is significant because SPPT PBB does not constitute proof of land ownership; nevertheless, its continuous issuance, when supported by tax payment records, open and good-faith physical possession, the existence of buildings, possession history, witness testimony, and other relevant evidence, may demonstrate the continuity of a person's relationship with the land in their possession. This article aims to analyze the legal position of SPPT PBB in proving land possession and the forms of legal protection available to taxpayers who continuously possess land when confronted with a holder of a Certificate of Ownership. The research employs a normative juridical method with a descriptive-analytical approach through the study of legislation, legal doctrines, and relevant court decisions. The analysis shows that a Certificate of Ownership remains strong evidence of land rights, whereas SPPT PBB cannot be regarded as proof of ownership and cannot automatically prevail over a land certificate. Nevertheless, long-standing, open, and good-faith physical possession supported by SPPT PBB and other relevant evidence should not be disregarded in resolving land disputes. Legal protection for taxpayers should therefore not transform SPPT PBB into proof of ownership, but should recognize its proportionate evidentiary value as part of a broader chain of evidence demonstrating land possession, prevent unilateral eviction or dispossession, and ensure that disputes are resolved through fair legal procedures. Accordingly, a balanced approach to legal protection is necessary to reconcile legal certainty for certificate holders with justice for parties who have actually and continuously possessed the land and buildings.

Referensi

Buku

Harsono, Boedi. Hukum Agraria Indonesia: Sejarah Pembentukan Undang-Undang Pokok Agraria, Isi dan Pelaksanaannya. Jakarta: Djambatan, 2007.

Ismail, Nurhasan. Hukum Pengurusan dan Pendaftaran Hak Atas Tanah: Teori dan Praktik. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Hukum dan Politik Agraria. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka, 1988.

Santoso, Urip. Hukum Agraria: Kajian Komprehensif. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2017.

Santoso, Urip. Pendaftaran dan Peralihan Hak Atas Tanah. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2019.

Artikel Jurnal

Antikowati, Ulfa Rohmati, and Andika Putra Eskanugraha. “Kekuatan Sertipikat Hak atas Tanah sebagai Bukti Kepemilikan Objek Pengadaan Tanah bagi Kepentingan Umum.” Jurnal Kajian Konstitusi 2, no. 2 (2022): 219–233.

Azminazilah, et al. “Kepastian Hukum Pengenaan BPHTB kepada Pemilik Tanah dan/atau Bangunan yang Belum Bersetifikat dalam Rangka Pendaftaran Tanah Sistematis Lengkap.” Officium Notarium 3, no. 2 (2023): 140–153.

Bola, Mustafa. “Legal Standing of Customary Land in Indonesia: A Comparative Study of Land Administration Systems.” Hasanuddin Law Review (2017): 175–190.

Bunga, Marten, Robby Waluyo Amu, and Leni Dwi Nurmala. “Certificate of Land Property Rights as an Evidence in Land Dispute Settlement.” IJRAEL: International Journal of Religion Education and Law 2, no. 1 (2023): 5–12.

Debora, Frina, et al. “Problem of Land Ownership Certificates as Legal Proof of Ownership.” Problematika Hukum 8, no. 2 (2022): 74–81.

Haerani, Hadijah. “Solusi dan Langkah Kongkrit dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Pertanahan di Indonesia.” Ranah Research: Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development 7 (2024): 860–866.

Hunowu, Muhammad R. Hamdiansyah. “Tinjauan Hukum Sertifikat Hak Atas Tanah sebagai Tanda Bukti Hak Berdasarkan Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997.” Lex Privatum 9, no. 3 (2021): 184–194.

Imron, Ahmad, and Ahmadi. “Kedudukan Hukum SPPT PBB sebagai Alat Bukti Kepemilikan Tanah yang Sah Menurut Ketentuan Perundang-Undangan.” Yuriska: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 17, no. 2 (2025): 245–257.

Laurensia, Cangtika, and Gunawan Djajaputra. “Hak Para Pihak dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Sertifikat Hak Atas Tanah Tumpang Tindih sebagai Upaya Perlindungan Hukum.” Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia 8, no. 11 (2023): 6393–6404.

Limbong, Tania Mayshara, Ayu Trisna Dewi, and Rina Melati Sitompul. “Tanggung Jawab PPAT atas Bea Perolehan Hak atas Tanah dan Bangunan (BPHTB) pada Akta Jual Beli Tanah dan Bangunan di Kota Medan.” Law Jurnal 3, no. 1 (2022): 57–69.

Panjaitan, Simauli Margaretta, and Besty Habeahan. “Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Pemilik Sertifikat Hak atas Tanah yang Dikuasai oleh Pihak Ketiga Tanpa Hak.” Journal of Administrative and Social Science 7, no. 1 (2026).

Permadi, Iwan. “Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Pembeli Tanah Bersertifikat Ganda dengan Cara Itikad Baik demi Kepastian Hukum.” Yustisia Jurnal Hukum 5, no. 2 (2016): 448–467.

Pradnyautari, I Gusti Agung Putri, I Nyoman Darmadha, and I Wayan Novy Purwanto. “Kepastian Hukum bagi Pihak Pemegang Sertipikat Hak Milik Berdasarkan Pasal 32 Ayat (2) PP Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah.” Kertha Semaya: Journal Ilmu Hukum 8, no. 3 (2020): 413–423.

Putri, Ayu Bimo Setyo. “Itikad Baik pada Pendaftaran Hak atas Tanah dalam Sistem Hukum Pertanahan.” Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum 8, no. 1 (2017): 12–21.

Rejekiningsih, Triana. “Asas Fungsi Sosial Hak atas Tanah pada Negara Hukum (Suatu Tinjauan dari Teori, Yuridis dan Penerapannya di Indonesia).” Yustisia 5, no. 2 (2016): 298–325.

Riyadi, Sugeng. “Tinjauan Yuridis atas Upaya Pemulihan Hak Pemegang SHM Bertumpang Tindih: Kasus Putusan PN Cikarang Nomor 285/Pdt.G/2023.” Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara 15, no. 2 (2025).

Tista, Adwin. “Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Pemegang Sertipikat Hak Milik atas Tanah yang Mengalami Sengketa Kepemilikan.” Lambung Mangkurat Law Journal 4, no. 2 (2019): 162–175.

Wardhani, Shinta Novi. “Kekuatan Hukum Sertifikat Hak atas Tanah Dikaitkan dengan Kepastian Hukum dalam Pendaftaran Tanah.” Al-Qanun: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Pembaharuan Hukum Islam 21, no. 1 (2018): 61–84.

Widiyono, Try, and Md Zubair Kasem Khan. “Legal Certainty in Land Rights Acquisition in Indonesia’s National Land Law.” Law Reform 19, no. 1 (2023): 128–147.

Wulandari, Suhani. “Indicators of Land Rights Certificate Cancellation Caused by Overlapping Rights as Administration Failure.” Administrative and Environmental Law Review 1, no. 2 (2020): 113–124.

Yunus, Irwanda. “Sengketa Hak Atas Tanah yang Tidak Mempunyai Bukti Kepemilikan Hak Atas Tanah.” Alauddin Law Development Journal 5, no. 3 (2023): 436–441.

Karya Ilmiah

Aprini, Erpinka. Kepastian Hukum Sertipikat Hak Atas Tanah Kaitannya dengan Ketentuan Pasal 32 Ayat (2) Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah. Tesis, Program Pascasarjana Universitas Diponegoro, 2007.

Prosiding

Artono, H. B., and O. Hamdan Anggari. “Legal Protection of Taxpayers and Tax Insurers in Tax Disputes.” Conference Proceedings Jakarta Indonesia, ICABE 2018, 2018.

Peraturan Perundang-undangan

Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Peraturan Dasar Pokok-Pokok Agraria.

Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah.

Sumber Internet

Prakoso, Adji. “Yurisprudensi MA RI: Petuk Bukan Tanda Bukti Kepemilikan Atas Tanah.” MARINews, 14 Juli 2025. Diakses 9 September 2026.