Tax additional payments dropped for Zaporizhzhia agrocompany  

Tax issues: Inspections by state tax and fiscal agencies Zaporizhzhya region

Complainee: The Main Department of the State Tax Service in Zaporizhzhia Oblast (Zaporizhzhia STS)
Complaint in brief: An agrocompany from Zaporizhzhia Oblast approached the Council. The Complainant disagreed with the additional tax payments worth over UAH 600k.
During the audit, Zaporizhzhia STS found out the Complainant had violated a number of the Tax Code provisions, namely he had understated the VAT subject to be paid to the budget and had not registered the relevant tax invoices. 
Thus, Zaporizhzhia STS’s conclusions were based on the following: 
•    the Complainant wrote off the grain as “dead waste” in respect of which there were no sorting and drying certificates to confirm the quality, weediness and humidity as well as permits that would confirm the existence of the waste as such, their location and disposal;
•    excessive use of mineral fertilizers, which could reduce sown crops yield or cause their death; 
•    the company’s tractor drivers made inaccuracies in naming agricultural works performed in the primary documents drawn up during transportation of hay, firewood and waste, baling straw, disking, gardens plowing, in connection with which Zaporizhzhia STS established an inappropriate diesel fuel use; 
•    the Complainant did not accrue tax obligations, deducting costs due to loss of crops as a result of the drought.
Disagreeing with the tax authority’s conclusions, the company appealed them in the STS and asked the Council for help. 
Actions taken: Having examined the case file, the Council upheld the company’s position. The Council asked the STS in writing to properly consider the company’s complaint and consider the respective arguments. The Council’s investigator also participated in the company’s case consideration at the STS. 
Result achieved: The STS accepted the Council’s arguments and satisfied the company’s complaint. Additional payments worth over UAH 600k were dropped successfully. The Complainant thanked the Council for participating in the consideration and resolution of the case. 

Next case:: Property returned after triple arrest cancellation