1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against tax notices-decisions, by which “Energoconsult” LLC was additionally charged with corporate income tax and value-added tax, and the amount of negative VAT value was also reduced.
2. The court of cassation established that the courts of previous instances had violated the norms of procedural law, in particular, did not fully investigate the evidence collected in the case, did not properly assess the plaintiff’s arguments regarding the reality of economic transactions with all counterparties, did not establish the content of these transactions and which primary documents confirm them. The court noted that the mere fact of the existence of a verdict regarding the taxpayer’s counterparty, the initiation of criminal proceedings, tax information regarding counterparties in the supply chain, or minor errors in the execution of primary documents are not independent and sufficient grounds for concluding that economic transactions are unreal. The court also took into account that the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court departed from the previous conclusion that the status of a fictitious enterprise is incompatible with legal activity, and emphasized that the verdict regarding the official of the counterparty does not create prejudice for the administrative court, unless specific circumstances regarding the actions of the plaintiff are established. The court emphasized that the controlling body must prove that the taxpayer acted unreasonably, in bad faith, or without due diligence, using documents with unreliable data.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous instances and sent the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.
