Payment for services is made exclusively to the company's account. For your convenience, we have launched Kaspi RED 😎

Home / Publications / Evidence of administrative offenses The offender had no intention of concealing information about income and property

Evidence of administrative offenses The offender had no intention of concealing information about income and property

АMANAT партиясы және Заң және Құқық адвокаттық кеңсесінің серіктестігі аясында елге тегін заң көмегі көрсетілді

Evidence of administrative offenses The offender had no intention of concealing information about income and property

By a resolution of the Astrakhan District Court of the Akmola region dated May 31, 2019, K. was brought to administrative responsibility under part 1 of Article 274 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Code) with the imposition of an administrative penalty in the form of a fine of 88,375 tenge. By the decision of the judicial board for Civil cases of the Akmola Regional Court dated July 4, 2019, the decision of the court of first instance remained unchanged. In the submission of the Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, it is proposed to review the judicial acts of local courts that have entered into force due to violations of uniformity in the interpretation and application of legal norms by courts. It follows from the case file that on April 10, 2019, K., holding a government position, submitted to the authorized body a declaration on individual income tax and property for 2018 in the form of 230.00 in violation of the deadline. According to this fact, a protocol on an administrative offense was drawn up against K. under part 1 of Article 274 of the Administrative Code. Having considered the case of an administrative offense, the court came to the conclusion that the guilt of the said person in the commission of the offense was proven. However, this conclusion is unfounded on the following grounds. Part 1 of Article 274 of the Administrative Code provides for administrative liability for the intentional failure to submit or submit incomplete, unreliable declarations and information on income and property subject to taxation. In accordance with Article 26 of the Administrative Code, actions are considered intentional when a person was aware of the unlawful nature of his action, foresaw its harmful consequences, desired or consciously allowed these consequences to occur, or was indifferent to them.

Evidence of administrative offenses The offender had no intention of concealing information about income and property

According to the case file, K. submitted an individual income tax return on form 240.00 within the deadline set by the tax legislation, on March 29, 2019. The submitted tax return does not contain any notes with a warning or explanation that cannot be filled in by certain categories of taxpayers. After receiving the notification dated April 10, 2019 about the failure to submit tax reports in the required form, K. submitted an individual income tax and property declaration on form 230.00. At the same time, the amounts of accrued and taxable income, the amount of withheld income tax in the submitted forms 240.00 and 230.00 corresponded to each other. These circumstances collectively indicate that K. He had no intention of concealing information about income and property by submitting to the authorized body a declaration containing reliable data, albeit in the erroneous form 240.00. Accordingly, K.'s act was unreasonably qualified as intentional failure to submit or submit incomplete, unreliable declarations and information about income and property due to the lack of evidence of intent. K.'s arguments the unintentional mistake he made when filling out the declaration deserves attention. The Specialized Judicial Board of the Supreme Court annulled the judicial acts of local courts in the case of an administrative offense provided for in Part 1 of Article 274 of the Administrative Code, in respect of K. The proceedings in the case of an administrative offense were terminated due to the absence of elements of an administrative offense in K.'s actions. According to Article 864 of the Administrative Code, K. is recognized as having the right to compensation for damage as a result of unlawful administrative prosecution. The submission of the Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan is satisfied. 

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 

Evidence and proof

Evidence and proofAccording to paragraph 2 of article 129 of the CPC, in an administrative process, the burden of proof lies with the administrative body. The plaintiff, in ac...

Read completely »