RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
11/12/2025
Thursday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
11 December 
2020 International Mountain Day.
2019 International Mountain Day.
1946 UNICEF was founded by the United Nations.
1946 UNICEF was organized by the United Nations.
1699 Peter I established the St. Andrew's flag as the official flag of the Russian military fleet.
11 December
2020 International Mountain Day.
2019 International Mountain Day.
1946 UNICEF was founded by the United Nations.
1946 UNICEF was organized by the United Nations.
1699 Peter I established the St. Andrew's flag as the official flag of the Russian military fleet.
INCLUSION IN THE REGISTER OF TAX ARREARS RESTORED AFTER THE CANCELLATION OF A JUDICIAL ACT
The tax service applied to the court with a request to include the debtor's debts on taxes, penalties and fines in the register (case no. A51-21455/23).
The Court of first instance, having assessed the evidence presented, concluded that the tax authority had taken timely measures to enforce debt collection. It was established that the initial claim for debt payment was submitted within the established time frame, and the enforcement measures were sent to the bailiff service. Since the decision of the tax authority on additional taxes was restored after the cancellation of the previous judicial act, the debt is subject to inclusion in the register of creditors' claims. Additionally, it is indicated that at the time of the dispute, the deadline for the application of enforcement measures has not expired. Consequently, the requirements of the tax authority are justified and are subject to partial satisfaction.
The appeal changed the ruling, guided by the fact that after the cancellation of the previous judicial act, which invalidated the decision of the tax authority on additional taxes, the authorized body had to reapply the enforcement measures within a six-month period. However, these measures were not implemented in a timely manner.
It was also stated that the possibility of collecting arrears was lost as of the end of 2023, as the debt became uncollectible. Consequently, the demand for payment of the debt, issued later, is unlawful. Thus, most of the claims of the tax authority cannot be included in the register of creditors' claims.
The cassation partially overturned the appeal ruling and upheld the ruling of the first instance, pointing out that the balance of the single tax account is formed on the basis of information available to the tax authorities about the unfulfilled duties of the taxpayer. At the same time, the amounts of debt for which the deadline for their compulsory collection has not expired by the end of 2022 are subject to inclusion in the balance of the unified tax account.
The date on which the disputed obligations arose, for which it was necessary to apply enforcement measures, was determined by the decision of the cassation court on the dispute over the invalidity of the tax decision. The deadlines for compulsory collection began to flow from this date, namely: the deadline for the articles on filing a claim is the beginning of June 2022; the deadline for the articles on collection at the expense of funds is mid–August 2022; the deadline for the articles on collection at the expense of property is February 2023. Thus, as of the end of 2022, the deadline for compulsory debt collection has not been missed. Consequently, the conclusions of the Court of Appeal to the contrary are based on an erroneous interpretation of the rules of law in relation to the specific circumstances of the case.
Photo: Freepik
The Court of first instance, having assessed the evidence presented, concluded that the tax authority had taken timely measures to enforce debt collection. It was established that the initial claim for debt payment was submitted within the established time frame, and the enforcement measures were sent to the bailiff service. Since the decision of the tax authority on additional taxes was restored after the cancellation of the previous judicial act, the debt is subject to inclusion in the register of creditors' claims. Additionally, it is indicated that at the time of the dispute, the deadline for the application of enforcement measures has not expired. Consequently, the requirements of the tax authority are justified and are subject to partial satisfaction.
The appeal changed the ruling, guided by the fact that after the cancellation of the previous judicial act, which invalidated the decision of the tax authority on additional taxes, the authorized body had to reapply the enforcement measures within a six-month period. However, these measures were not implemented in a timely manner.
It was also stated that the possibility of collecting arrears was lost as of the end of 2023, as the debt became uncollectible. Consequently, the demand for payment of the debt, issued later, is unlawful. Thus, most of the claims of the tax authority cannot be included in the register of creditors' claims.
The cassation partially overturned the appeal ruling and upheld the ruling of the first instance, pointing out that the balance of the single tax account is formed on the basis of information available to the tax authorities about the unfulfilled duties of the taxpayer. At the same time, the amounts of debt for which the deadline for their compulsory collection has not expired by the end of 2022 are subject to inclusion in the balance of the unified tax account.
The date on which the disputed obligations arose, for which it was necessary to apply enforcement measures, was determined by the decision of the cassation court on the dispute over the invalidity of the tax decision. The deadlines for compulsory collection began to flow from this date, namely: the deadline for the articles on filing a claim is the beginning of June 2022; the deadline for the articles on collection at the expense of funds is mid–August 2022; the deadline for the articles on collection at the expense of property is February 2023. Thus, as of the end of 2022, the deadline for compulsory debt collection has not been missed. Consequently, the conclusions of the Court of Appeal to the contrary are based on an erroneous interpretation of the rules of law in relation to the specific circumstances of the case.
Photo: Freepik
10.12.2025
