Legal costs appear only after the initiation of proceedings

[Частный детектив Нижний Новгород]

The main criterion for attributing costs to litigation remains the time of their implementation

At the next meeting on October 18, 2011, the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation considered case No. A40-95760 / 08-116-293 Gazprom Dobycha Astrakhan Society versus the Interregional Inspectorate of the Federal Tax Service for Major Taxpayers No. 2.

The plaintiff, the company Gazprom dobycha Astrakhan (hereinafter referred to as the company), filed a claim for the recovery of legal costs from the tax service in the amount of more than 20 million rubles. These costs were incurred in connection with the payment of the services of persons who defended the interests of the company in court (6.6 million rubles), the services of an independent appraiser who was involved in giving an opinion on the conformity of prices for products sold by the company with the market (2.5 million rubles), as well as interest paid to the bank for issuing a bank guarantee. The guarantee was provided as security upon application for suspension of the inspection decision (10.9 million rubles). The decision of the inspection was challenged in court and was subsequently partially reversed.

The arbitration courts satisfied the requirements only in terms of recovering court costs for the payment of representatives' services in the amount of 200 thousand rubles.

The courts, refusing the company to satisfy the claim for reimbursement of the costs of the services of an independent appraiser, proceeded from the lack of grounds for their qualification as judicial, since these costs were not related to the consideration of the case on contesting the inspection decision in the arbitration court. According to the courts, only the costs associated with the consideration of the case in court, which were incurred after the initiation of the proceedings, are subject to reimbursement as legal costs. Disputed expenses, as incurred at the pre-trial settlement stage, do not meet the specified requirement. The contract with the appraiser was concluded after the audit report was drawn up in July 2008, and the case on invalidating the inspection decision was opened in December 2008.

According to the applicant, according to the provisions of Article 101 and 106 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the criterion that makes it possible to classify expenses incurred by a party as judicial costs is their connection with the consideration of the case in the arbitration court. This relationship is not due to the time the expenses were incurred, but the purpose of incurring them is to generate evidence submitted by the taxpayer in support of circumstances indicating the absence of a tax offense and the illegality of the decision to bring to tax liability. The list of legal costs, referred to in article 106 of the APC of the Russian Federation, is not exhaustive and, accordingly, the range of expenses for paying for the services of specialists cannot be considered as limited only to those payments made in favor of experts involved by the court for conducting forensic examinations.

"The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dismissed the statement of Gazprom Dobycha Astrakhan LLC," says Anton Struzhkov, general director of the Glossa Legal Center. "Thus, the main criterion for attributing costs to the court remains the moment of their implementation."

Anton Struzhkov

RB.ru - business network, 10.25.2011

 

[@InfoPoisk]

Thank.

 

[НСК-СБ]

Interesting, thanks!