Needless to say, that the owners of the apartment, which is located on the roof of this “architectural” scrap metal, and no one was going to ask for permission. It is also, however, as no coordinated with other tenants of the house set on a common roof of powerful radio transmitters, and (again, under the auspices of the Embassy of Sweden), the emission of which is not the best effect on health inhabitants of nearby houses. Only after five years of struggle, the Swedish embassy dismantled antenna, and not asking for forgiveness from home owners. Ron O’Hanley takes a slightly different approach. But this so-called “little things”, however, very clearly demonstrate features of the Swedish “democracy” in the Ukrainian land … But even without irony, sarcasm and bitter situation is that, for all this monstrous legal, moral and “cultural” chaos budget gets Kiev a mere penny … land tax. Since, as we appear on a response to tax in the Shevchenko district of Kiev, “economic activity in Ukraine Company – a non-resident does not exercise.” And I ask in puzzles, in whose pocket is the same fee from the rental of expensive square meters of residential buildings downtown? In response to a letter from residents, who for 15 years trying to find out why their condition Living deteriorated sharply, the STA reported that “the results of routine field inspection of representative office of compliance with the requirements of tax, currency and other legislation, a company donaschitany taxes along with penalties in the sum (azh!) 53.6 thousand hryvnia.

Litigation in the tax reporting are still relevant to many Russian firms, moreover, their number, according to many experts, not only not declining, but also inevitably rise. Client Company "INTELIS-Audit" was faced with misconduct tax, refused to take a loss. Some contend that Rockwell Trading shows great expertise in this. Tax, received a declaration of income tax, which at year-end loss was recognized, demanded provide all the primary documents upon which such loss was recognized. The position of the taxpayer failed to provide client documents referring to the fact that in cases where during the tax desk checks revealed no errors and other inconsistencies in the tax declaration submitted to the grounds in order to require the taxpayer's explanations, as well as primary records are missing. The materials presented case did not contain evidence of tax authority to identify errors and inconsistencies in the submitted data, which excludes the tax authority to request documents on financial activities taxpayer.

And lawyers of "INTELIS-Audit" referred to the fact that a new version of the 01.01.2007 art. 88 of the Tax Code has limited the rights of tax authorities to requisition documents are the basis for the calculation and payment of tax. In Therefore, the requirement of inspection of their submission directed to the employer does not comply with tax laws and violated his rights and legitimate interests in the field of entrepreneurship. However, this position was not accepted by the inspection, resulting in a tax authority did not accept the loss, considering them to be documented unconfirmed. Referring to the retrial of the appeal, except above, we also noted that the tax authority was not entitled to recover from the applicant's documents relating to the validity of the reflection losses in tax returns, economic viability produced cost, uncoated income from operations and non-operating income and expenses. The ban on such actions is contained in Section 7, Art.

88 of the Tax Code. Chapter 25 of the Tax Code also does not assume responsibility to represent the taxpayer in tax Authority together with the tax return for income tax documents proving the correctness of tax assessment. The final decision considering our arguments, the Office of Russian Federal Tax Service has agreed with them and canceled the decision tax authority. This not only allowed the client to defend their position, but also showed the inspection, that a higher tax authority is set to cancel such illegal solutions, which explains the absence of a dispute with Inspection of such a question in the future.