OUR PRACTICE

Examples of procedures, where we worked in the Debtor interests:

Case No. А40-143742/2010

Task:
— To liquidate Company;
— To save property for stakeholders;
— To achieve other positive results in favor of the Debtor owners.
Task result:
The Company is liquidated, the property remains in the possession of current owners, the negative consequences for the owners and management of the Debtor did not come.

Case No. А56-5960/2013
Task:
— To liquidate Company;
— To save property for stakeholders;
— To achieve other positive results in favor of the Debtor owners.
Task result:
The Company is liquidated, the property remains in the possession of current owners, the negative consequences for the owners and management of the Debtor did not come.

Case No. А40-44965/2013
Task:
— To liquidate Company;
— To save property for stakeholders;
— To achieve other positive results in favor of the Debtor owners.
Task result:
The Company is liquidated, the property remains in the possession of current owners, the negative consequences for the owners and management of the Debtor did not come.

Case No. А41-17120/2013

Task:
– To liquidate the Company, without a field tax audit. One month prior to applying the bankruptcy petition, the Debtor has sold the real estate, and, accordingly, there was the task to keep the property for its purchaser;
— To identify the legal grounds for the release of the owners and management of the Debtor from the subsidiary and criminal liability. There were two major creditors in the case, one of which was the tax authority. There has been achieved a balance of interests with one creditor, and not achieved with another one – the tax authority.

Task result:

The Company is liquidated, the property remains in the possession of current owners, the negative consequences for the owners and management of the Debtor did not come. There also was carried out a tax audit, which resulted to a tax overpayment identification and recovered from the tax authority. These funds were used for repayment of creditors’ claims in the corresponding proportional part where the tax authority has got a small amount.

Case No. А40-110301/2013
— The task was to liquidate the Company, without a field tax audit. During 6 months prior to the filing of a bankruptcy petition, the debtor has alienated a number of assets, in connection with this, the task was to keep the property for its purchaser;
— To identify the legal grounds for the release of the owners and management of the Debtor from the subsidiary and criminal liability. There were several creditors in the case, one of which was a well-known bank. Balance of interests was reached with all creditors and not reached with the bank.
Task result:

The Company is liquidated, the property remains in the possession of current owners, the negative consequences for the owners and management of the Debtor did not come.

Examples of procedures where we acted in the interests of Creditor:

Case No.№ А06-8025/2014
The manager was set the following tasks:
— To identify the property and return it to the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate for its subsequent distribution among creditors;
— To identify the legal grounds for the involvement of the owners and management of the Debtor to the subsidiary and criminal liability.
Task result:
— The property is identified and returned to the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate for its subsequent distribution among creditors, which allows to satisfy the claims of creditors in the amount of 60% of the established claims of creditors;
— There were identified the legal grounds for the involvement of the owners and management of the Debtor to the subsidiary and criminal liability under Art. 199, 159, 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Appropriate materials have been sent to the investigating authorities, the criminal cases have been filed.

Case А40-50236/2013
The manager was set the following tasks:
— To identify the property and return it to the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate for its subsequent distribution among creditors;
— To identify the legal grounds for the involvement of the owners and management of the Debtor to the subsidiary and criminal liability.
Task result:
— The property is identified and returned to the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate for its subsequent distribution among creditors, which allows to satisfy the claims of creditors in the amount of 45% of the established claims of creditors;
— There were identified the legal grounds for the involvement of the owners and management of the Debtor to the subsidiary and criminal liability and the mentioned persons have been prosecuted.

It is quite difficult to place examples of our consulting and tax audit results, as it relates to disclosure of clients’ tax and business secrets. However, many of the results of our work are expressed in the judicial practice, in this connection, we suggest to learn some of our work:

The client in its activity guided by our tax advice. According to one consultation, there have been assessed additional taxes payable. Within the framework of consulting protection, we have recognized additionally accrued payments illegal, without additional charge.

 9AAS Judgment in the case No. 09АП-15370/2008

We decided that the Legislative Assembly of the Chuvash Republic has set too high interest rates on UTII. In this regard, the increased tax rates have been found illegally set and only minimum rates remained in operation, allowing our taxpayer to significantly reduce the amount of tax payable to the budget.

 Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Chuvash Republic in the case No. А79-7103/2009

In the above case, we recognized the Chuvash Republic Act invalid in terms of higher tax rates. And this case concerns the fact that our client has returned the overpaid tax amount from the budget for the last three years.

Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Chuvash Republic in the case А79-9173/2010

Representing the interests of the taxpayer, we have declared illegal the decision of the tax authority on the additional accrual of taxes due to relationships with short-lived companies. This case is noteworthy by the fact that the taxpayer had no other counterparties, according to the tax authority, which corresponded to reality. As a result of our hard work, all counterparties have been proven to be the most real and honest.

Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court in the case No. А40-146121/2009

This is a matter of our “tax audit” series. We felt that VAT amounting to more than 10,000,000 rubles has been overpaid. However, the tax authority, by withholding to return tax, pointed out that three years have passed from the date of its payment, and there are no corresponding invoices. We have lost this case in first instance, but we won the appeal and cassation instances.

Resolution on the case No. 10AAS А41-2968/2010

This judicial act for the recovery of legal costs to the client representation in court:

 Determination of the AU of the Moscow region in the case А41-3473/2012

Defending the interests of the taxpayer, we have declared illegal the decision of the tax authority to charge additional taxes due to the relationship with short-lived companies. There is a lot of practice on such matters, but it is controversial. This case is interesting by way of proving that the short-lived company is a real, honest and conscientious taxpayer in reality:

Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Chuvash Republic in the case No. А79-2853/2013

Transfer of tax inspection materials to the investigative committee is provided by the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. After that, the investigating committee usually initiates a criminal case on the fact of tax evasion under Art. 199 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, this can be avoided by recognizing illegal the fact of transfer of tax audit materials to the investigative committee. There is no practice on this issue, but we have tried and we succeeded:

Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Chuvash Republic in the case No. А79-7333/2013

This is a result of work of “tax audit” series. And it is interesting by that neither the tax authority nor taxpayer knew that they overpaid the amount of tax to the budget, moreover the tax authority had confidence that the declared amount of tax was previously returned, and the requirement of the taxpayer was directed for the subsequent return of the tax amount. We have proved the fact of tax overpayment and money has been returned to its rightful owner:

Decision of the Arbitration Court of Moscow region in the case No. А41-60073/2013

This case is one of a series when requesting a tax refund and winning the case in the first instance court, the taxpayer was not going to recover interest for late tax refund amount from the tax authority. However, due to the fact that the tax authority has appealed the decision of the court of first instance, we announced in the appeal of an additional requirement for the interest recovery. The requirement has been satisfied.

Resolution 10 AAS on the case А41-60073/2013

Through our legal support, the client was able to recover the disputed tax amount:

Decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court in the case No. А40-153494/2014