{"id":7629,"date":"2025-03-31T10:10:29","date_gmt":"2025-03-31T07:10:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-826-24697-15-dated-26-03-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-03-31T10:10:29","modified_gmt":"2025-03-31T07:10:29","slug":"case-no-826-24697-15-dated-26-03-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-826-24697-15-dated-26-03-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 826\/24697\/15 dated 26\/03\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here is the translation:<\/p>\n

Subject of Dispute: Challenging a Tax Notification-Decision on Additional VAT Tax Liabilities for the Consortium “Scientific and Production Association “Ukrhydroenerhobud\u02ee.<\/p>\n

Key Court Arguments:
\n1. The court established the validity of the Consortium’s economic transactions with counterparties LLC “Diso Company” and LLC “Triada Torg”, as:
\n– Primary documents comply with legislative requirements
\n– Actual movement and use of goods has been confirmed
\n– Goods were involved in the actual production process of constructing the Dniester Pumped Storage Power Plant<\/p>\n

2. The court applied the principle of taxpayer’s good faith, indicating that the mere fact of potential counterparty violations cannot automatically deprive the taxpayer of the right to tax credit.<\/p>\n

Court Decision: Uphold previous court decisions and reject the tax authority’s request to cancel the Consortium’s tax credit.<\/p>\n

Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here is the translation: Subject of Dispute: Challenging a Tax Notification-Decision on Additional VAT Tax Liabilities for the Consortium “Scientific and Production Association “Ukrhydroenerhobud\u02ee. Key Court Arguments: 1. The court established the validity of the Consortium’s economic transactions with counterparties LLC “Diso Company” and LLC “Triada Torg”, as: – Primary documents comply with legislative requirements…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[57,42],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7629","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-court-practice-ukraine","category-eu-legislation-important","pmpro-has-access"],"acf":{"patreon-level":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7629","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7629"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7629\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7629"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7629"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7629"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}