+ Word must be in search result. - Words must not be in search result. * Word start/end on characters before/after symbol. ""Words in quotes will be searched as phrase.

 

KM Partners has defended the interests of METRO CASH & CARRY UKRAINE in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine confirming the right for return the local taxes’ overpayment in ATO territory

07 June, 2019 Chronicles and faces

METRO CASH & CARRY Ukraine from April 2014 to March 2016 was paying taxes for shopping centers and land plots, on which such shopping centers are located, which were in the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine, and with the fact that the company could not really use and dispose this property. So, we can talk about the absence of reasons for taxes that are collected from the owners/users of such property.

It was recognized at the legislative level, and from January 1, 2017, such amounts of taxes were granted overpayment status. However, rather quickly after, the legislator additionally found that such amounts are not a subject to return by the Law “On Amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine on Improvement of Investment Climate in Ukraine” of March 23, 2017, No. 1989–VIII (Law No. 1989).

However, the discretion even of the legislative authority is limited and has to comply with the Constitution. The specialists of worked out the position and the normative justification for a constitutional complaint of the METRO CASH & CARRY Ukraine and proved in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine that the provision of the Law No. 1989 regarding deprivation of the right for overpayments returning for the land tax for land plots, which are located in ATO territory (now – JFO), contradicts the rule of law principle (in particular, the guarantee of legal certainty) and violates the right of property guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine.

The Constitutional Court of Ukraine agreed with the position and argumentation presented in the constitutional complaint and recognized the provision of the Law No. 1989 regarding deprivation the right for return of overpayments from the land tax for land plots which are located in ATO territory, which does not comply with the provisions of part I, Article 8, part IV Article 41 of the Constitution of Ukraine. The full text of the corresponding decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with details No. 3-p (І)/2019 as of June 5, 2019 was published on the website of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine by the link.

Due to this Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the rights of METRO CASH & CARRY Ukraine and other taxpayers on overpayments return from local taxes in the ATO territory will be restored, and also a solid foundation will be laid for solving other disputed tax issues and the development of tax disputes in general.

Representation of interests of METRO CASH & CARRY Ukraine during the working-out of the legal position and preparation of the appeal to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine was carried out by team of experts of , Senior of Counsel Maria Kozlenko and Lawyer Artem Shcherbyna under the supervising of Senior Partner Aleksander Minin.

Views 1835

SIMILAR POSTS

Criminal method of tax administration 01 April, 2024    397

Templates of notification of a crime based on Article 366 “Official forgery” / Article 367 “Official negligence” of the Criminal Code of Ukraine 01 April, 2024    52

Order of the State Tax Service of Ukraine No. 204 as of May 12, 2020, on arrangement of work of the Commissions dealing with suspension of registration of Tax Invoice / Adjustment Calculation in the Unified Register of Tax Invoices 26 January, 2024    1027

Is a taxpayer entitled to submit to the court documents, which were not previously provided to the tax authority, and is there a ground for the court to disregard these documents? 15 May, 2023    1924

The District Administrative Court of Kyiv will be liquidated. What does this mean for the parties whose cases are under consideration in the court? 13 December, 2022    740

The status of “risky”: To appeal or not to appeal? 23 November, 2022    1273

SUPREME COURT: DEMAND ON RECOGNITION OF INCOME FROM LONG-TERM DEBT DISCOUNTING IS ILLEGAL 27 May, 2021    4603

Changes in the tax sphere effective from January 1, 2021 02 February, 2021    6778

The magic of numbers, or
Limitation periods in tax disputes: 1095 vs. 30
23 December, 2020    7579

Attention! Changes related to terms for challenging tax accruals to the court after administrative appeal stage. And other terms in other cases 22 December, 2020    1055

“Day D”: Draft Law No. 1210 has been adopted in the second reading and as a whole 17 January, 2020    2171

Inconsistency of the Law with the Constitution in administrative proceedings: admission cannot be ignored 17 January, 2020    5491

Comment