Here is the translation of the legal analysis:
1. Subject of Dispute: Challenging tax notifications-decisions issued by the controlling authority regarding an individual entrepreneur in connection with violations during a documentary inspection.
2. Main Arguments of the Court:
The court did not accept the entrepreneur’s arguments about the impossibility of providing documents due to occupation of territories. It established that the entrepreneur did not comply with the legally prescribed procedure for notifying about document loss. In particular, the letter provided by the entrepreneur did not meet the requirements of subsection 69.28 of the Transitional Provisions of the Tax Code. Moreover, the court drew attention to the fact that the entrepreneur did not provide convincing evidence of equipment relocation to occupied territories and its use.
3. Court Decision: To leave the cassation complaint unsatisfied, and previous court decisions unchanged, that is, to recognize the actions of the tax authority as lawful.
