Andrey Solomyany
Andrey Solomyany Andrey Solomyany

Andrey Solomyany

Industries

Manufacturing companies, FMCG, Construction

Qualifications

Partner, lawyer

Biography

Prior to obtaining the status of a lawyer, he worked for 15 years in the Federal Tax Service in a legal division.

He has experience in advising clients on the application of tax, civil and currency legislation.

He specializes in representing clients in arbitration courts challenging acts of tax authorities, in corporate disputes and bankruptcy proceedings. She supports projects of trustees in tax authorities at the stage of tax audits and pre-trial settlement of disputes.

Andrey's assistance allowed clients to challenge claims of tax authorities for substantial amounts, collect debts on contractual obligations of counterparties and avoid attracting persons controlling the debtor to subsidiary liability.

Cases

135 mln ₽
Court settlement of tax disputes

Defending a Russian construction company in an arbitration court at the stage of inclusion in the register of a tax authority claim in a bankruptcy case

Originally included in the register, the tax authority's claim was excluded due to the absence of tax arrears for the taxpayer.

  • Industry

    Construction

  • Process description

    As part of the bankruptcy proceedings, the tax authority's claim in the amount of RUB 135 million was included in the register of creditors' claims. The lawyers prepared a position with regard to this debt, namely: due to the fact that updated tax returns for VAT and income tax were filed, the amounts of claims must be adjusted, as the amounts payable on tax returns were initially filed by the previous management mistakenly.

  • Result

    The Moscow City Arbitration Court annulled the decision to include the tax authority's claim in the register of creditors' claims and the court appointed a new consideration taking into account the evidence provided.

  • Employee involved

    Andrey Solomyany

Successfully
Court settlement of tax disputes

Defended the interests of the largest supplier of household appliances in arbitration court in a case of additional taxation of imported goods with the participation of the chain of resellers.

Exclusion by the tax authority of material evidence against a disputed counterparty of a major supplier of household appliances

  • Industry

    FMCG

  • Process description

    With regard to the client, a tax audit was carried out, as a result of which the tax authority provides evidence that the audited entity actually purchased the disputed products directly from the importer bypassing the chain of suppliers. One of the evidence of fictitiousness was the protocol of inspection of warehouse and office premises, which the tax authority established the absence of this counterparty at the addresses and concluded that the supplier could not store the goods. The lawyers collected the information proving the falsification of the evidence submitted by the tax authority.

  • Result

    In the course of the court proceedings, the tax authority excluded this evidence, which initially formed the basis for the tax audit decision, from its position.

  • Employee involved

    Andrey Solomyany

135 mln ₽
Court settlement of tax disputes

Challenging additional charges to a major retailer in a case concerning the application of tax deductions for VAT on recycled goods

Claims tax authority was made in connection with the unjustified inclusion in the composition of VAT deductions and profit tax costs incurred in the relationship with the disputed supplier, as well as the improper application of VAT deductions for recycled goods.

  • Industry

    FMCG

  • Process description

    The tax authority charged the grocery retailer additional VAT and income tax on the fruit supplier, citing the impossibility of tracing the goods from the importer to the final supplier for this delivery, as well as the presence of formal claims against the supplier. Also in connection with the fact that the fruit supplied was of improper quality and disposed of by the client within the same tax period, the tax authority further argued the impossibility of applying VAT deductions due to the lack of the object of taxation.

  • Result

    As a result, claims of the tax authorities were successfully challenged in the arbitration court after the second round of judicial appeal since the Tax Compliance lawyers managed to prove the reality of transportation of fruits from the importer to the disputed supplier. They also provided a technological description of the utilization of the goods and the validity of the VAT deduction for the disputed transaction.

  • Employee involved

    Andrey Solomyany

2,5 bn ₽
Court settlement of tax disputes

Representing an IT-company, a subsidiary of the largest telecom operator and IT-solutions developer of the Southern and North Caucasian Federal Districts, in a dispute with the tax inspectorate

This was the first case of a tax dispute over whether transactions with counterparties in traffic transfer services were real. For the first time, a decision was made in favor of the taxpayer.

  • Industry

    Information technology

  • Process description

    The client appealed to the arbitration court with a claim to the tax authority to invalidate the decision made on the basis of the field tax audit. The basis for the accrual of additional taxes, penalties and fines served as the basis for the conclusions of the tax authority that the Client received a tax benefit in the relationship with several counterparties, which, as telecommunications operators, could not provide services for traffic transit in connection with the fact that they had signs of organizations that do not perform real financial and economic activities. A particular difficulty in proving the case lies in the fact that the "traffic service" is not tangible and can not be visualized, so it was very difficult to collect evidence of the reality of transmitting traffic. As the result of legal efforts and well-designed defense strategy the court of the first instance partially rendered a judgment in favor of the Client. In this case the court saw an opportunity to interpret the concept of "due diligence" in favor of telecom companies. This approach (if supported by higher courts) can be used by other recipients of similar services (in particular, telecommunications companies), both at the stage of selecting counterparties, and when defending against claims of tax authorities.

  • Result

    Tax Compliance team managed to defend around 50% of additional tax charges (in terms of corporate income tax, the client's claims were recognized as legitimate). This dispute is unique and constitutes positive arbitration practice for the entire telecommunications industry.

  • Employees involved

    Mikhail Begunov, Denis Kozhevnikov, Andrey Solomyany

23 mln ₽
Currency regulation

The company's interests in the case of violation of currency legislation were protected in arbitration courts of three instances.

Challenging of the tax authority decision on violation of the terms of loan repayment, issued by the taxpayer to a foreign company.

  • Industry

    Manufacturing companies

  • Process description

    In the opinion of the tax authority, the organization violated the term for receiving (returning) the deposit by a resident of foreign currency in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement issued by the taxpayer to the foreign company

  • Result

    As a result, all claims of the tax authority with regard to violation of terms for receiving foreign currency by a resident in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement were successfully challenged in courts of 3 instances, as the tax authority did not take into account the submitted additional agreements to the loan agreement with the foreign company.

  • Employees involved

    Mikhail Begunov, Andrey Solomyany

Publications