On the compulsion to write off tax arrears on vehicles State Revenue Department

No. 6001-24-00-6ap/3062 dated February 21, 2025

Plaintiff: V.S.

Respondent: Russian State Institution "State Revenue Administration"

The subject of the dispute: the compulsion to write off tax arrears on vehicles

Review of the plaintiff's cassation complaint PLOT:

By the verdict of the city court of May 24, 2013, K. was found guilty of fraud, that is, theft of other people's property by deception and abuse of trust, of a MITSUBISHI RVR motor vehicle owned by the plaintiff, qualified by paragraphs a), b), part two of Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Thus, the plaintiff's car was stolen as a result of illegal actions of the convicted person, therefore, since 2013, the plaintiff did not actually own, use or dispose of the vehicle. The tenant in use, who had the transport, filed a complaint in 2012 about the initiation of a criminal case on the theft of property.

Resolving the dispute and partially satisfying the claim, the court of first instance concluded that the accrued amount of tax arrears on a MITSUBISHI RVR vehicle was illegal due to the existing judicial acts to which the provision of paragraph 6 of Article 493 of the Tax Code applies.

Canceling the decision of the court of first instance and rejecting the claim, the appeals board proceeded from the fact that the plaintiff had not independently taken measures to de-register the MITSUBISHI RVR vehicle, the car had not been put on the wanted list by the investigative authorities, it had not been stolen since the initiation of the criminal case, in addition, the plaintiff was not recognized as the injured party..

Judicial acts:

1st instance: the claim is partially satisfied. The Management is responsible for exempting the plaintiff from paying tax (writing off tax arrears) on a MITSUBISHI RVR vehicle. The claim for the compulsion to write off the tax arrears on the OPEL MERIVA brand vehicle was denied.

Appeal: the decision of the court of first instance was changed, in the satisfied part it was canceled with the issuance of a new decision to dismiss the claim.

Cassation: the decision of the judicial board on administrative cases has been changed. Regarding the refusal of the claim to impose on the Management the obligation to write off tax arrears on a MITSUBISHI RVR vehicle, it was canceled with the retention of the decision of the first instance in the specified part.

The rest of the resolution remains in force.

Conclusions: by virtue of paragraph 6 of Article 493 of the Tax Code, effective from January 1, 2018, the basis for exemption from tax for the period of the search for a vehicle reported stolen and (or) stolen from the owners is information confirming the fact (date) of the initiation of a criminal case on the theft (abduction) of the vehicle provided by to the tax authorities by the authorized state body in the field of vehicle registration. In this case, the calculation (accrual) of such a tax is terminated from the date of initiation of a criminal case on the theft (theft) of a vehicle.

In accordance with article 43 of the Law "On Legal Acts", the normative legal act does not apply to relations that arose before its entry into force. Exceptions to this rule are cases when a regulatory legal act eliminates the duties assigned to citizens or improves their situation.

Since the tax arrears on the MITSUBISHI RVR vehicle have been listed on the plaintiff's personal account since 2014, the court verdict on the theft of the car took place on May 24, 2013, the norms of paragraph 6 of Article 493 of the Tax Code are applicable to disputed legal relations as improving the plaintiff's position.

In this regard, the judicial board agreed with the conclusions of the court of first instance on the legality of the stated claims.

The appeal instance's reference to the court order dated June 1, 2017, as the basis for rejecting the claim, is untenable, since its presence does not prevent the plaintiff from filing claims to compel him to write off his tax arrears on the basis of paragraph 6 of Article 493 of the Tax Code.

The provision of the above-mentioned norm also does not link the issue of tax exemption from timely fulfillment by the plaintiff of the obligation to remove the car from the register.

Thus, the judicial board considered the conclusions of the court of first instance on the partial satisfaction of the claim legitimate and justified. Considering that the circumstances of the case have been established correctly, but an error has been made in the application of substantive law and the assessment of evidence, the contested judicial act is subject to change from

by upholding the decision of the court of first instance.

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases