Source: http://kmp.ua/en/analytics/infoletters/history-of-the-victory-the-court-of-appeal-cancelled-the-court-ruling-on-appointment-of-the-tax-audit/
Timestamp: 2018-10-19 19:31:09
Document Index: 700298968

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 309', 'Art. 36', 'Art. 40', 'Art. 205', 'Art. 205', 'Art. 212', 'Art. 205', 'Art. 212']

» History of the Victory.The Court of Appeal cancelled the Court ruling on appointment of the tax audit under subpara. 78.1.11 of the Tax Code of Ukraine (case of A. Zhurzhii)
History of the Victory.
The Court of Appeal cancelled the Court ruling on appointment of the tax audit under subpara. 78.1.11 of the Tax Code of Ukraine (case of A. Zhurzhii)
In particular, KM Partners issued the analytical material, which has justified the illegality of the appointment of tax audits within criminal proceeding under subpara. 78.1.11 of the TC of Ukraine, which establishes the right of the tax authorities on conducting of the tax audits in case when (quote):
“the court (investigative judge) decision on the audit appointment was obtained, delivered according the law”.
This issue drew attention of the deputy of Ukraine Andrii Valeriiovych Zhurzhii, who knows not on paper but in real life how much illegal pressure of the controlling authorities affects the business. In addition, Andrii Valeriiovych Zhurzhii is a lawyer with the huge experience, and upon the results of the research on this issue, he decided to join the struggle against the illegal appointment of the tax audits.
So, Andrii Valeriiovych sent a number of deputy requests to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Committee on Legislative Support of Law Enforcement and to courts located in Kyiv, in which the issue on the appointment by the investigating judges of tax audits under subpara. 78.1.11 of the TC of Ukraine was highlighted, asking to consider the abovementioned issue at a meeting of judges and to express the position concerning the presence of the legitimate reasons for investigating judge to deliver decisions on the appointment of the documentary unscheduled audit in the criminal proceeding under the petition of the investigator, prosecutor.
Letter of Solomianskyi District Court of Kyiv as of February 02, 2017;
Letter of Sviatoshynskyi District Court of Kyiv as of January 31, 2017;
However, such “well known” courts as Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv and Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv by the Letter as of December 28, 2016 and Letter as of February 03, 2017 gave the formal replies to deputy request, stating that the mentioned issue is out of the area of issues considered at the general meetings of judges.
These complex actions produced their first results, whereas some investigating judges really started to deny the appointment of tax audits under the petitions of the investigators/prosecutors, for example: Court ruling as of January 19, 2017, Court ruling as of January 27, 2017, Court ruling as of January 05, 2017.
However, by a twist of fate, the tax audit of citizen Andrii Valeriiovych Zhurzhii was appointed under subpara. 78.1.11 of the TC of Ukraine by the investigating judge by the Court ruling of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv as of February 28, 2017 in the case No. 757/11320/17k (hereinafter – the “Court ruling” in USRCD) for the period of 2013-2016, within criminal proceeding, which was closed in 2015.
But if life gives you a lemon, make lemonade, and Andrii Valeriiovych had so-called “personal” opportunity to become a pioneer in changing the court practice on this issue. Andrii Valeriiovych decided to appeal against the illegal Court ruling of the investigating judge on the appointment of a tax audit to the Court of Appeal.
In particular, the sole fact of adoption by the Kyiv Court of Appeal to consideration of such appeal was a small victory. Thus, Art. 309 of the CPC of Ukraine, which contains a comprehensive list of investigating judges’ court rulings that can be challenged, does not include the court rulings on the appointment of a tax audit within the criminal proceeding. But our right to appeal, we justified by the following:
Art. 36, Art. 40 of the CPC of Ukraine does not provide rights/authority of the investigator/prosecutor to refer to the investigating judge with petition on appointment of a tax audit within criminal proceeding;
Upon the results of consideration, the Kyiv Court of Appeal satisfied by the Court ruling of as of April 11, 2017 the appeal and cancelled the Court ruling of Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv as of February 28, 2017 in the case No. 757/11320/17k on the appointment of a tax audit stating that (quote):
Thus, taking the abovementioned into account, the panel of judges came to the conclusion that the investigating judge having considered the petition of the prosecutor on appointment of a document unscheduled tax audit by the merits, in this case acted in manner not based on the requirements of procedural law“.
We consider such decision of the Kyiv Court of Appeal as a step to formation of a new court practice of cancellation of the illegal decisions of the investigating judges on appointment of tax audits within criminal proceeding and in the future, we hope, to formation of the practice of refusing by the investigating judges in satisfaction of such petitions of pretrial investigation authorities.
Presidential Administration answered whether ATO was completed	01 October, 2018 337
Cassation Administrative Court is applying to the Grand Chamber: urgent questions and results	26 September, 2018 295
Judgments of the Supreme Court in tax disputes under Art. 205 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine concerning the contractor (the first 8 months)	21 August, 2018 345
Is the practice of the Supreme Court formed if there is Art. 205 of the Criminal Code concerning the contractor?	21 August, 2018 2568
Criminal proceedings on tax evasion: statistics and verdicts within first half of 2018	17 August, 2018 502
The Supreme Court: the right to appeal court rulings on appointment of tax audits within criminal proceedings is approved!	20 July, 2018 3811
Verdicts in criminal proceedings under Art. 212 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the first quarter of 2018	02 July, 2018 333
Criminal proceedings on tax evasion within first quarter of 2018: how did the year begin for taxpayers?	02 July, 2018 434
“The fifth wheel to the coach”, or what is Art. 205 of the Criminal Code in practice for?	27 June, 2018 461
Criminal proceedings on tax evasion: summary statistics for 2017	17 April, 2018 749
Verdicts in criminal proceedings under Art. 212 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for 2017	17 April, 2018 265
Іnterrogation protocol and tax information cannot be regarded as evidences of “fictitiousness”	13 April, 2018 1577
Смирнов Іван 28 April, 2017
KM Portal 28 April, 2017
Калініченко Борис 03 May, 2017