Court supported the controlling authority's position regarding legality of adoption of financial sanctions

Cassation court supported the controlling authority's position regarding legality of adoption of financial sanctions, which were applied for violation of requirements of Paragraphs 1, 2 Article 3 of the Law of Ukraine № 265/95-VR and on the basis of Paragraph 1 Article 17 of the Law of Ukraine № 265/95-VR.

Financial sanctions were applied to the plaintiff for failure to issue appropriate settlement document confirming execution of settlement transactions upon sale of alcoholic beverages.

Controlling authority's position is that since requisites of the excise tax mars were missing in settlement documents (digital value of the barcode of the excise tax mark for alcoholic beverages), such documents cannot be recognized as settlement documents.

Absence of such obligatory requisites in the fiscal check for products (services) issued by the business entity – excise tax payer, as the product subcategory code according to Ukrainian classification of the foreign economic activity products, digital value of the bar code of the excise tax mark on alcoholic beverages deprives such document of the settlement status, accordingly, creation and printing, and similarly, issuing document to the buyer with such a defect cannot be considered a proper fulfillment of obligation established by Paragraph 2 Article 3 of the Law of Ukraine № 265/ 95-VR.

Therefore, the Court came to the conclusion that in disputed case, documents related to the sale of alcoholic beverages cannot be recognized as invoices, since they do not contain obligatory requisite – digital value of the bar code of the excise tax mark on alcoholic beverages. Controlling authority correctly qualified the specified circumstances as a violation of Paragraph 2 Article 3 of the Law № 265/95-VR, which is basis for application of financial sanctions (fine) according to Paragraph 1 Article 17 of the Law № 265/95-VR.

In the view of content of argumentations and grounds of the cassation appeal, the complaint does not contain any comments or objections regarding the fact that the controlling authority revealed the fact that the plaintiff did not properly fulfill obligations established in Paragraph 2 Article 3 of the Law № 265/95-VR, namely, failure to provide a person, who receives products in a compulsory manner, settlement document of the prescribed form and content for the full amount of transaction, created in paper and/or electronic form with indication of the digital value of the bar code of the excise tax mark on alcoholic beverages.

By the decision of the Supreme Court as a part of the Cassation Administrative Court as of 09.09.2024 in case № 640/18036/19, the plaintiff’s cassation appeal was dismissed. Decision of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal as of 19.09.2022 was left unchanged.