russian Chinese (Simplified) English filipino italian japanese Korean malay thai vietnamese
Information publication Arbitration took the side of entrepreneurs in a dispute with the fiscal authority
December 19 2018

Arbitration took the side of entrepreneurs in a dispute with the fiscal authority

(1 Rate)
Rate this item
Arbitration took the side of entrepreneurs in a dispute with the fiscal authority

The Arbitration Court of the Chelyabinsk Region ruled in favor of the RusPromTehSnab company, which imports electric motors for grain crushers, in a dispute with the customs authorities. The fiscal authorities, as the instance found, illegally charged businesses for payments for imported equipment.

Conflicts related to additional payments — primarily duties — are permanent in the relationship between importers and customs officers. One of these resonant processes was a dispute between RusPromTehSnab LLC and the Chelyabinsk Customs, as previously described in detail by Pravda UrFO.
As you know, when importing goods into the Russian Federation in the declaration indicates its classification code, which is the basis for the calculation and calculation of customs duties. The customs authority has the ability to double-check the specified code and charge a multi-million dollar duty for the last three years of supplying this product. At the same time, the importer is not saved by the fact that deliveries can be carried out regularly for a long time under the same code, which previously did not cause any claims of fiscals.
“In September last year, customs initiated the inspection of our products. They opened the container, seized the engines for examination, and about a month later decided that the goods were incorrectly classified according to the customs code for the declaration of the TNVED, ”Pavel Goncharov, commercial director of RusPromTechSnab, recalls the sources of the conflict.
As a result, the product was, according to the head of the company, 11-interest duty. The amount of 1,5 mln rubles was written off from the company's current account. Since for the entire period of deliveries surcharge could reach 10 million rubles, Pavel Goncharov did not rule out the closure of society.
However, the customs officers themselves referred to the provisions of the law, allowing them to unilaterally review the results of previous inspections and charge additional fees. In some cases, the declarant may face criminal liability.
“If the key technical or qualitative characteristics of the goods are incorrectly indicated and this has affected its classification, then this fact forms the composition of an administrative offense, the sanctions for which can amount to two unpaid sum differences in the budget. In the case when the monetary difference is significant, the declarant may also fall under criminal liability, ”Stanislav Vasev, the deputy head of the Chelyabinsk Customs for economic activities, explained the actions of the employees.
However, during the preparation of the application to the court by lawyers representing the interests of the importer, it became clear that fiscal authorities committed a significant number of gross violations, including when revising the classification code.
“The most surprising thing is that the customs authority submitted to the case file two versions of the contested classification decisions, which differed from the decision sent to the declarant. That is, after the application was submitted to the court, the customs authority worked on the mistakes made by the customs authority and indicated as irregularities in the application to the court, but from the first time it did not work out all the errors, therefore another version of the decision for the same number from the same date as the decision being appealed. Total in the case file were three decisions of customs with different content. In addition, the customs claimed that the declarant imported a different type of engine than stated and documented the declarant. At the same time, the customs authority made conclusions based solely on the conclusions of customs experts who have no relation to electrical engineering, as it turned out in court, one of the customs experts is a radio amateur, and he was convinced that this was enough to be considered an expert.
It must be remembered that the expert of the Central Forensic Customs Administration, in which the product was studied and which is included in the structure of the customs authorities, is first of all the senior or chief, but definitely state customs inspector, therefore the expert opinion is not independent, complete and objective . That is why we filed a petition for a forensic examination, independent of the opinion and influence of the customs authority, which, in fact, confirmed our correctness, ”said Peter Lesnikov, managing partner of the foresters law firm, told the details of the process.
As a result, on December 17 arbitration ordered the return of illegally collected funds to the company. The court satisfied the requirements of RusPromTechSnab LLC, declared illegal the decision of Chelyabinsk customs from 6 of September 2017 on the classification of goods by TNVED, ordered the state body to return to society the excessively charged customs payments, and also to recover from the Chelyabinsk customs legal costs in the amount of 172 rubles, and RUB and RUB for the amount of X. in the amount of 3 thousand rubles.
Experts meanwhile pay attention to the significance of the decision of the instance for Russian importers. “Despite the unprecedented law in the Russian Federation, the judiciary constantly analyzes previous court decisions. Therefore, we can safely say that the decision made yesterday will allow entrepreneurs to save millions of rubles, and sometimes save the business from bankruptcy, ”said the source, specializing in legal disputes with customs authorities.

Author: Bogdan Budnik
A source:

read 1739 time