Projects

Collecting several million hryvnias of duty and VAT, paid in by mistake while importing equipment due to illegal refusal of customs authorities to accept Customs Cargo Declaration.

Law firm Globus ensured protection of interests of a large publishing house in its dispute with customs authorities regarding the payment of several million hryvnias of duty and VAT while importing equipment that is not produced in Ukraine and imported to the customs territory of Ukraine to be used in publishing and manufacturing books in Ukraine.
    Experts of Law firm Globus proved that under the contradiction in par. 1 p. «в» part 1 art. 19 of the Law of Ukraine «On Unified customs rate» between the verbal description and codes of the Ukrainian Classifier of Foreign Economic Trade Products preferences in customs duty and VAT must be applied basing not on the code of the Ukrainian Classifier of Foreign Economic Trade Products, but according to the verbal description of product items. The basis for the Ukrainian Classifier of Foreign Economic Trade Products is distribution of products by specific descriptive criteria into the above classification categories. The digital code in the Ukrainian Classifier of Foreign Economic Trade Products is not the basis for the products classification, but it is merely assigned to classification groups for convenience in using the Ukrainian Classifier of Foreign Economic Trade Products.
    In the result, customs declaration refusal cards were cancelled and the fact of faulty payment of the duty and VAT while importing the abovementioned equipment was established.
    According to the Court Order several million hryvnias of duty and VAT, paid by mistake while importing the equipment, were collected from the State budget of Ukraine in favour of the client of law firm Globus.
    The issue of succession in title was also settled during the legal proceedings.
    The customs body that refused to accept customs declarations was liquidated with no successors in title. Nonetheless, specialists of law firm Globus proved that the procedural successor of the above customs body in this administrative case is the customs body, which is now operating the customs in the respective region and whose competence now includes the settlement of the issue on excluding violation of rights, freedoms or interests of the claimant.
    On these bases a newly established customs body was summoned as the defendant under this administrative case. The correctness of the position of the experts of law firm Globus was confirmed by administrative courts during the trial.