The procedure for studying the financial activities of an individual or legal entity regulates With Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a desk tax audit must be carried out in strict accordance with the rules specified in the Code. Otherwise, it will not be difficult for the taxpayer to challenge the actions of the “tax authorities”. Let's consider in more detail what nuances you should pay attention to.

According to paragraph 1 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a desk audit is carried out at the location of the tax inspectorate, that is, in the building of the department. The basis for its implementation is the tax return of the entrepreneur and other documents (they are either already available to the inspectors, or the taxpayer has to provide them).

Note that if a taxpayer (individual or legal entity, foreign organizations) does not submit a tax return on time, inspectors have the right to conduct an audit based on the data that they have, while also involving data on other, similar companies (enterprises). But they will be able to do this after three months from the moment the declaration was supposed to “be” in their hands. If the taxpayer submits a declaration at the moment when the check is already “launched”, the inspectors are obliged to stop it and start a new one, based on a new document.

"Cameralka" is not carried out on the basis of a special declaration, which is filled in by a citizen who decides to voluntarily declare his assets, bank accounts.

Large companies provide reporting on electronic media. If for some reason they forget to bring the document within the period established by law, the inspector is obliged to send them a reminder notice within a month. At the same time, it should be clarified what document is expected and in what form it should be provided.

According to paragraph 2 of this article, a desk audit is carried out by employees of the tax inspectorate, for this they do not need special permission from the head of the cameral department (as, for example, when conducting an on-site audit).

False Information

If the taxpayer provides information that does not correspond to real facts (for example, there will be errors in the calculations or a lower tax amount will be indicated in the revised declaration), he will have to explain the reason for what happened. In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the taxpayer has the right to provide extracts from the tax or accounting records as evidence. accounting and other documentation.

The inspector has the right to demand explanatory documents even if the information is suspicious.

If the inspector decides that the taxpayer has committed a serious misconduct and should be punished, then, according to Article 100 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, he is obliged to draw up an act and indicate in it all the necessary information (the fact of violation and punishment).

Additional documents

If the payer submits a VAT refund declaration, he must submit documents confirming his right to receive the corresponding tax deduction along with it. If inaccuracies, inconsistencies are revealed in such a declaration, which will lead to an underestimation of the amount of VAT (the entrepreneur is obliged to pay) or, conversely, an increase in the amount that the state must return to him by law, the law allows inspectors to require the entrepreneur to provide invoices, invoices and other documentation confirming the legality of the entrepreneur's actions.

A foreign company that has registered for tax purposes in the territory of the Russian Federation and submits a VAT refund declaration is obliged to document that it sells its products on the territory of our state.

If an entrepreneur is a party to an investment partnership agreement, he is obliged to provide documents confirming this fact and indicating the amount of his income (expenses) received (incurred) as a result of the activities of this partnership.

If the taxpayer-seller of excisable goods submits the declaration and indicates in his document that he is entitled to a tax deduction (excise amount), since the goods were returned by the buyer, he is also obliged to provide documents confirming the legality of his actions.

Insurance payments

This type of expense may also be the basis for requesting additional documentation. If the tax agent indicates insurance payments in the expense item, he is also obliged to provide documents that can confirm the legality of his requirements not to tax these amounts.

According to paragraph 13 of article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, if an entrepreneur made mandatory insurance contributions due to the fact that one of his employees was temporarily disabled or the employee was on sick leave for pregnancy and childbirth, the verification of such a declaration is regulated by the provisions of Chapter 34 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

So, Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation regulates the procedure for conducting a desk audit. There is a clear algorithm for the actions of the tax inspector and the taxpayer. Any violations are fraught with negative consequences: the payer will have to be punished (for example, a fine), and the illegal actions of the tax inspector may lead to the fact that the results of the "camera room" will not have legal force.

When considering the issue of conducting desk audits, the taxpayer should be guided by the following articles of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation: 88, 93, 93.1, 100, 101, 101.4.

At the first stage of a desk audit, conducted on the grounds listed in paragraph 3 of Art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the tax authority sends the taxpayer a request to provide explanations or make corrections to the tax return (calculation). The taxpayer is obliged to respond to the tax authority in writing within five days, even if the response contains information about the unlawfulness of the claim. Tax authorities, in connection with a desk tax audit, on the basis of a written notice, can call the taxpayer to give explanations directly to the tax office, but, we repeat, only if errors are found in the taxpayer's declaration (calculation) and there are other grounds specified in paragraph 1 of this Article. 3 art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. The judges drew attention to these circumstances in the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 11.11.2008 N 7307/08. If the tax inspectorate does not declare the identification of errors and contradictions in the information provided by the taxpayer, then in this case, by virtue of clause 7 of Art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation there are no grounds for demanding explanations from the taxpayer, as well as primary accounting documents. According to the above paragraph of Art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, when conducting a desk tax audit, the tax authority is not entitled to demand additional information and documents from the taxpayer, unless otherwise provided by this article or if the submission of such information and documents together with the tax declaration (calculation) is not provided for by the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

In connection with the foregoing, the tax authority does not have the right to demand documents under paragraph 3 of Art. 88, as well as paras. 4 p. 1 art. 31, art. Art. 146, 147, 148 ch. 21, ch. 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

The demand for documents within the framework of a desk audit may be carried out by the tax authority on the basis of its decision to carry out additional tax control measures, which are carried out within the time period established by par. 1 p. 6 art. 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, after drawing up an act of a cameral tax audit (clause 5, article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

Grounds for requesting documents

1. Application by the taxpayer of tax benefits.

Acting within the framework of paragraph 6 of Art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the tax authority may conduct a desk audit in order to confirm the validity of the declared tax benefits in relation to:

Taxpayers who apply benefits for land tax, property tax, transport tax (Chapters 28, 30, 31 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation);

Taxpayers applying VAT exemptions, etc.

We also note that the tax authority, within the framework of a desk tax audit, is not entitled to demand documents in order to justify the losses incurred by the organization following the results of the reporting (tax) period.

2. Application in the VAT tax return of the right to a tax refund (clause 8, article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

In this case, the tax authority has the right to demand documents confirming in accordance with Art. 172 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the legitimacy of applying tax deductions (for example, invoices). But, for example, documents on the payment of wages, job descriptions of employees, a breakdown of expenses reflected in the declaration in the form 3-NDFL, have nothing to do with VAT reimbursement from the budget (Resolution of the FAS DO of September 30, 2009 N F03-5056 / 2009 ). The Ministry of Finance adheres to the position that the tax authority, when conducting an in-house tax audit of a VAT return, in which the right to a tax refund is declared, has the right to demand any documents confirming the legality of applying tax deductions (Letter dated 11.01.2009 N 03-02-07 / 1-1 ).

In this regard, we note some positive developments in relation to taxpayers. On January 1, 2010 Art. 176.1 "Declaration procedure for tax refunds" of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. The new declarative procedure for VAT refunds, without reducing the effectiveness of tax control, should support the development of the economic activity of taxpayers. Legislators did not dare to shorten the terms of a desk audit, carried out when checking a tax return, in which the right to a VAT refund is declared.

But only large companies will be able to use the specified procedure for VAT refunds. At the same time, the procedure and terms for conducting a cameral tax audit of the submitted tax return have not changed. In the event that the tax authority makes a decision to refuse to reimburse the amount of tax claimed for reimbursement, VAT reimbursement in a declarative manner is carried out in accordance with Art. 176 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

Moreover, the Federal Law of December 17, 2009 N 318-FZ presents a more loyal approach to the formal claims of the tax authorities to fill out invoices, which prevented the acceptance of VAT deductible from the budget.

3. Carrying out a desk tax audit on taxes related to the use of natural resources (clause 9, article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

4. Carrying out additional measures of tax control during a tax audit (clause 6, article 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

According to paragraph 2 of Art. 93 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the requested documents are submitted in the form of copies certified by the person being checked.

Forms for notification of a taxpayer's call, requirements for the submission of documents (information), instructions for the reclamation of documents (information), decisions on additional tax control measures were approved by Order of the Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation dated May 31, 2007 N MM-3-06 / [email protected]"On approval of the forms of documents used by tax authorities in the exercise of their powers in relations regulated by the legislation on taxes and fees".

Requesting documents from contractors or other persons

Retrieval of documents (information) in accordance with Art. 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a tax authority may carry out both during a tax audit (desk or field audit), and during other tax control measures.

If the demand for documents from a counterparty or other persons who have documents (information) relating to the activities of the taxpayer being audited is carried out as part of other tax control measures, as such, there is no restriction on the period for which documents can be demanded. In this case, it is important that the person to whom the request was sent checks the compliance of the requirement to submit documents sent by the tax authority at the place of registration of the above person with a copy of the order to request documents (information). Clause 2 of the Procedure for the interaction of tax authorities on the execution of orders for the reclamation of documents, approved by Order of the Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation dated December 25, 2006 N SAE-3-06 / [email protected](hereinafter referred to as the Procedure for Interaction), it is established that the form of an instruction to request documents must contain, among other things, a list of documents required, indicating the period to which they relate. The order must necessarily reflect, during the implementation of which tax control measure, the need to submit documents (information) arose. If the measure of tax control is a desk audit carried out by the tax authority, then we again return to the timing of this event, established by paragraph 2 of Art. 88, paragraph 6 of Art. 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which do not change in any way. Under the circumstances considered, the position of the Ministry of Finance, set out in the Letter of November 23, 2009 N 03-02-07 / 1-519, regarding the absence of restrictions on the period for which documents can be requested in accordance with Art. 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is ambiguous.

We also note that in court, the order of the tax authority to demand documents may be declared invalid if the latter violates the procedure for filling out such an order, for example, if it does not indicate the period for conducting a desk tax audit (Resolution of the FAS DO dated September 30, 2009 N F03-5056 / 2009).

A person from whom information is requested outside the framework of a tax audit, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation must submit documents that relate exclusively to a specific transaction of this taxpayer. Unfortunately, even officials of the Ministry of Finance agree that Art. 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation and the Procedure for Interaction do not contain a specific list of documents required by the tax authorities from the counterparty or other persons who have these documents (information) relating to the activities of the taxpayer (fee payer, tax agent) being checked, as well as documents on transactions (Letter dated 02.05. 2007 N 03-02-07/1-209).

Rights of the person whose documents are requested (information)

The taxpayer has the right to participate in the process of consideration of tax audit materials (clause 2, article 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). The head (deputy head) of the tax authority is obliged to notify the person in respect of whom the audit was carried out of the time and place of consideration of the tax audit materials. Violation of the rules on notifying a taxpayer of the time and place of consideration of audit materials, including taking into account the results of additional tax control measures, is a violation of an essential condition for the procedure for considering tax audit materials and entails the cancellation by a higher tax authority or court of a decision of a tax authority to attract bringing) to responsibility for committing a tax offense by virtue of the provisions of paragraph 14 of Art. 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of December 15, 2009 N VAS-14940/09).

In the Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of July 12, 2006 N 267-O, the judges emphasized that the provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 of Art. 88 and paragraph 1 of Art. 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation are interrelated and assume that the tax authority conducting a desk tax audit, upon detection of tax offenses, is obliged to require the taxpayer to provide explanations and documents confirming the correct calculation and timely payment of taxes, and notify him of the date and place of consideration of the audit materials by the head (deputy head) of the tax authority. Moreover, the right of the taxpayer to present their objections to the law enforcement act arises from the moment the tax authority presents a requirement to provide appropriate explanations and documents confirming the correctness of the calculation and the timeliness of paying taxes, that is, even before being held accountable for committing a tax offense (Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 03.10.2006 N 442-O).

At the same time, the legislative norm establishing the obligation of the tax authority to notify the taxpayer of the time and place of the decision based on the results of consideration of tax audit materials, in the provisions of Art. 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is not contained. Indeed, the day a decision is made based on the results of consideration of tax audit materials may not coincide with the day of consideration of tax audit materials. Explanations of financiers on this issue are presented in the Letter dated 15.01.2010 N 03-02-07 / 1-14.

In addition to all that has been said, we would like to draw the attention of readers to the duty of the tax authorities to comply with the deadlines for conducting a desk audit, established by paragraph 2 of Art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Skipping the specified deadlines by the tax authority will make it possible to challenge in court the actions of tax authority officials carried out as part of this tax audit. Unfortunately, according to the arbitrators, the three-month period for conducting a desk audit is not restrictive and the consequences of missing it are not provided for by the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (Resolution of the FAS ZSO dated July 27, 2009 N F04-4437 / 2009 (11028-A45-41)).

We would like to remind readers that the terms for conducting a desk tax audit increase if an updated declaration was submitted before its completion. In accordance with paragraph 9.1 of Art. 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in this case, the desk tax audit of the previously submitted declaration (calculation) is terminated. From the date of submission of the amended declaration, the calculation of the period for conducting a new desk audit in relation to this declaration begins.

If the taxpayer has already submitted documents at the request of the tax authority, the latter is not entitled to demand the same documents again, regardless of the purpose of their demand. Unfortunately, in practice, a situation often arises when the same documents are requested by the tax authority repeatedly, as a result of which the taxpayer is forced to submit piles of paper copies. We hope that from 01.01.2010 there will be no such arbitrariness on the part of the tax authorities.

From 01.01.2010 clause 5 of Art. 93 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, according to which, during a tax audit, the tax authorities are not entitled to demand from the audited person documents that were previously submitted to the tax authorities during desk or field tax audits of this audited person. This restriction does not apply to cases where the documents were previously submitted to the tax authority in the form of originals, subsequently returned to the person being audited, as well as to cases where the documents submitted to the tax authority were lost due to force majeure.

Equipping inspections with appropriate equipment and software in order to implement paragraph 5 of Art. 93 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation will automate the process of internal electronic exchange of documents, but only in relation to those documents that are submitted to the tax authorities after 01/01/2010.

Responsibility of the person from whom the documents (information) are requested

A person's refusal to submit the documents requested during a tax audit or failure to submit them within the established time limits is recognized as a tax offense and entails liability under Art. Art. 126 and 129.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (clause 4 of article 93 and clause 6 of article 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). For failure to provide information necessary for the implementation of tax control, by virtue of Art. 15.6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, administrative responsibility is imposed on officials.

Documents that were requested during a tax audit must be submitted within 10 days from the date of delivery of the relevant request (clause 3 of article 93 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation) and within five days from the date of receipt of the requirement to submit documents (information) (clause 5 article 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). If the requested documents cannot be submitted within the specified period, the tax authority, at the request of the person from whom they are requested, has the right to extend the deadline for submitting these documents. In turn, the tax authority cannot arbitrarily and unreasonably refuse to extend the deadline for submitting documents. In the Decree of the FAS PO dated January 22, 2009 in case N A55-8517 / 2008, the judges indicated that "by virtue of Article 129.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, tax liability arises in the event of an unlawful failure to report (untimely failure to report) by a person of information that, in accordance with this Code, this person must inform the tax authority, in the absence of signs of a tax offense provided for in Article 126 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation ... Therefore, the norms of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation do not allow an unmotivated, arbitrary refusal of the tax authority to extend the deadline for submitting documents if there is a corresponding request from the taxpayer, because provisions Paragraph 5 of Article 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation provides, along with the right of the tax authority to extend the deadline for submitting documents (information), the right of the taxpayer to apply for an extension of such a period if the requested documents (information) cannot be submitted within the specified period.

The commented article regulates the content of the desk audit, the place and duration of its conduct.

First of all, it should be noted that since 2007 (i.e., almost a decade ago), the desk audit procedure has been significantly modified, it has become much more regulated and regulated. In particular, the term for submission of explanations is fixed, the taxpayer's right to submit documents confirming the accuracy of the data entered in the tax declaration (calculation) is fixed. The long overdue problem of requesting documents within the framework of a desk tax audit has been resolved, because earlier the tax authorities had the right to request an unlimited number of documents during an audit without conducting an on-site tax audit.

An in-house tax audit is carried out by a tax authority on the basis of a tax declaration (calculation) and documents submitted by the taxpayer, as well as other documents on the activities of the taxpayer, available to the tax authority, within three months from the date of submission of the tax declaration (calculation) by the taxpayer.

Extension of the three-month term of the desk audit of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is not provided.

The Ministry of Finance of Russia drew attention to this in Letter No. 03-02-07/1-75 dated February 18, 2009.

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District, in Decree No. A40-85281/11-20-359 dated May 23, 2012, considered the situation in which the tax authority made a decision to extend the term for reviewing tax audit materials.

As the court noted, the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for the possibility of extending the terms of a desk tax audit, thus, the contested decisions of the tax authority were adopted with a violation of the deadline for conducting a desk audit by 5 months.

The Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga District of June 18, 2012 N A65-26603 / 2011 notes that, taking into account the provisions of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, an in-house tax audit of information on the income of individuals submitted on June 2, 2009 must be carried out by the tax authority before September 2, 2009. Since Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for a special time period for making a decision based on the results of a desk tax audit, such a decision must be made within the time limit of the audit itself, that is, within the time limits indicated above.

In Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District of September 19, 2012 N A66-376 / 2012, the court concluded that the tax authority, having discovered errors in the declaration (contradictions in documents), is obliged to send the taxpayer a request for explanations and consider the explanations submitted within the time limit camera check.

In Decree No. F09-5401/12 of July 16, 2012, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Urals District explained that within the three-month period established for conducting an in-house tax audit, the tax authority is obliged to carry out verification measures in relation to the tax declaration it has adopted. The extension of the three-month term of a desk tax audit of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is not provided.

An in-house tax audit cannot begin until the tax authority receives a tax return or tax calculation.

Based on the above, the Federal Tax Service of Russia, in Letter N AS-4-2/15309 dated September 13, 2012, explained that the determination of the moment when the three-month period for conducting an in-house tax audit begins is connected with the moment the tax authority receives the tax declaration (calculation), that is, it begins from the date of receipt tax authority of the tax declaration (calculation).

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not determine the start date and end date of a desk tax audit. The beginning and end of such an audit, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 100 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, are indicated in the act of a desk tax audit.

Since an in-house tax audit of a tax return cannot be carried out before it is received by the tax authority, the tax authorities are not required to indicate in the act of an in-house tax audit the start date of this audit, corresponding to the date the tax return was mailed. The deadline for conducting a desk tax audit should not depend on the method of submitting a tax return to the tax authority.

This conclusion is confirmed by the Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated June 19, 2012 N 03-02-08/52.

The tax authority is not entitled to conduct a desk audit without a declaration based on other documents.

It should be noted that this position is well-established (see Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 05.05.2010 N 03-02-08 / 28, Resolutions of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 06.26.2007 N 2662/07, dated 06.26.2007 N 1580/07, FAS North-Western District of July 25, 2011 N A56-53498 / 2010, of July 20, 2009 N A21-9761 / 2008).

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District, in Resolution N A66-4514/2008 of May 12, 2009, came to the conclusion that a certificate in the form 2-NDFL is neither a declaration nor a calculation in the sense of Articles 80 and 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, since it contains only information on paid individuals income and amounts of accrued and withheld tax.

In addition, the decision based on the results of the audit is made only on the basis of the declaration (calculation) and documents that are submitted by the taxpayer or are available to the tax authority.

Thus, the tax authority is not entitled to conduct a desk tax audit in relation to the tax agent on the basis of a certificate in the form 2-NDFL.

Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not prohibit the taxpayer from independently submitting to the tax authority before the end of the in-house tax audit documents that confirm the information specified in the tax return.

However, the tax authority, when conducting a desk audit, has the right to demand additional information and documents from the taxpayer only in the cases provided for by this article.

Anything else contradicts the essence of a desk tax audit and goes beyond the specific powers of officials of tax authorities granted to them during a desk audit. At the same time, the establishment of compliance of the submitted reporting with primary documents is the subject of an on-site tax audit, for which the Tax Code of the Russian Federation provides for a special procedure.

So, for example, the tax authority does not have the right to demand from the taxpayer documents confirming that he has not calculated VAT on certain transactions that are not subject to taxation for this tax.

The Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 18, 2012 N 4517/12 states that the taxpayer’s absence of the obligation to calculate and pay value added tax to the budget from operations for the sale of land plots (shares in them) is directly provided for by the norms of tax legislation and by virtue of Article 56 The Tax Code of the Russian Federation is not a benefit. Such a sale, which is not recognized as an object of value added taxation, is not taken into account when forming the tax base for the specified tax, while tax benefits in accordance with Article 56 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation apply only to certain categories of taxpayers.

Thus, sending a taxpayer, during an in-house tax audit, the requirement to submit documents confirming the legitimacy of recording transactions that are not subject to value added tax in tax reporting is contrary to the norms of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Consequently, bringing the organization to tax liability on the basis of paragraph 1 of Article 126 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation on the indicated basis is unlawful.

Also, the tax authority has the right to additionally request only those documents that are the basis for the calculation and payment of MET.

This is indicated in the Decree of the FAS of the West Siberian District of 09/04/2012 N A27-12833 / 2011.

The court came to the conclusion that based on the legal analysis of Articles 40, 336, 338, 339, 340, 342 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the accounting policy of the organization, in order for the tax authority to establish the fact of the full and timely calculation of the mineral extraction tax by the organization, it is necessary to have documentation containing information used by the organization when calculating the mineral extraction tax (on the proceeds from the sale of the extracted mineral; on the amount of the sold extracted mineral; on the amount of the extracted mineral; on the actual losses of the mineral; on the amount of expenses for shipment and transportation to the consumer, reducing the taxable base for the mineral extraction tax).

As the court noted, the certificate of conformity for the extracted mineral confirms the compliance of the extracted mineral with certain standards, the information contained in it is not related to the unit cost and the amount of the extracted mineral.

In Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Central District dated July 30, 2012 N A35-6929 / 2011, the court concluded that the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not contain provisions obliging a taxpayer to submit documents confirming the correctness of determining the tax base, including documents confirming the right to apply a professional deduction.

In the Ruling of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated December 26, 2012 N VAC-16450/12, the point of view is supported, according to which the tax authority is not entitled to refuse to reimburse the amount of value added tax to the taxpayer on the grounds that he did not prove the legitimacy of applying tax deductions, without claiming and not checking in accordance with article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the necessary documents specified in article 172 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. When deciding on the legality of the application by the taxpayer of the zero percent tax rate and tax deductions, the results of cross-checks carried out by the tax authorities regarding the reliability, completeness and consistency of the submitted documents are taken into account.

In the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga-Vyatka District dated October 9, 2012 N A11-8626 / 2011, the court indicated that the powers of the tax authority, provided for in Articles 88 and 101 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, are of a public law nature and do not allow the tax authority to arbitrarily refuse the need to request additional information , explanations and documents confirming the correctness of the calculation and timely payment of taxes. When exercising the function entrusted to it to identify tax offenses, the tax authority in all cases of doubt about the correctness of paying taxes, and even more so when it detects signs of a tax offense, is obliged to use the authority granted to it to demand the necessary information from the taxpayer.

Within the meaning of Articles 88, 93 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the requirement to submit the documents required for a tax audit must contain sufficiently specific data on the documents required by the tax authority, and the required documents themselves must be relevant to the subject of the tax audit. The conclusion about this is contained in the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District of October 24, 2012 in case N A67-1688 / 2012.

The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 7307/08 dated November 11, 2008 indicated that in cases where the tax authority, during an in-house tax audit, did not reveal errors and other contradictions in the submitted tax return, grounds for demanding explanations from the taxpayer, as well as primary accounting documents no.

This was also pointed out by the Ministry of Finance of Russia in the Letter dated 07/25/2012 N 03-02-08 / 65.

In the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated August 27, 2012 N A56-52104 / 2011, the court, taking into account these positions, concluded that the tax authority did not declare the identification of errors and contradictions in the information provided by the entrepreneur in the disputed declaration, which excludes the possibility of requesting documents on financial and economic activity. Moreover, paragraph 2 of Article 346.13 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, when applying for the application by the taxpayer of the simplified tax system from the moment of its registration, does not impose on the latter the submission of any documents to the tax authority.

In view of the foregoing, the tax authority unlawfully demanded from the entrepreneur documents relating to the correct calculation and payment of tax under the simplified tax system, declared in the submitted declarations.

In the Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the East Siberian District dated August 28, 2012 N A10-355 / 2012, the court considered the situation in which the tax authority sent a message to the taxpayer with a request to provide explanations (amendments to the tax return), in which the tax inspectorate indicated the need to submit within five working days from the date of receipt of this notice of clarification and make the necessary changes.

It follows from the provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation that the disputable message is considered by the legislator as a procedural document adopted as part of the ongoing desk audit of the tax return, which does not give rise to the emergence, change or termination of the rights and obligations provided for by law for the person to whom the message is addressed.

The disputed report N contains information on the verification of the tax declaration submitted by the organization. At the same time, the implementation of the proposals set forth in it is not mandatory for the taxpayer, since it does not entail liability under the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
Thus, the court concluded that the message with a proposal to provide explanations (amendments to the tax return) does not have the properties of a non-normative legal act, but is a document of a procedural nature, does not give rise to any legal consequences, does not impose on the applicant any or obligations, in connection with which it is not subject to appeal in court.

Taking into account the provisions of paragraph 5 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which allow establishing the fact of a tax offense based on an assessment by the tax authority of the explanations and documents submitted by the taxpayer, it should be concluded that there is an obligation of the taxpayer and, as a result, the right of the tax authority to demand from the taxpayer primary documents confirming the reliability data entered in the tax return, if a discrepancy between these data and the information contained in the documents available to the tax authority received during the tax control is revealed during a desk audit.

Such conclusions are set out in the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District of June 25, 2012 N A56-29740 / 2011.

As noted in the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District dated December 19, 2012 N F03-5646 / 2012, from the interrelated interpretation of the provisions of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which allow the establishment of the fact of a tax offense on the basis of an assessment by the tax authority of the explanations and documents submitted by the taxpayer, the duty of the taxpayer follows and, as consequently, the right of the tax authority to demand from the taxpayer primary documents confirming the accuracy of the data entered in the tax return, if during a desk audit a discrepancy between these data and the information contained in the documents available to the tax authority received during tax control is revealed.

In the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District of December 18, 2012 N F03-5950 / 2012, the court indicated that the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not imply duplication of control measures carried out as part of on-site and in-house tax audits (Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 8, 2010 N 441-О-О) . The possibility of using special measures (inspection, seizure, questioning of witnesses) during desk audits is not directly provided for in Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

The right granted to the tax authority by Part 4 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as well as by Article 93 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, to request additional documents from the taxpayer during a desk audit should be directly related to errors discovered by the tax authority in declarations or other documents submitted by the taxpayer.

In cases where the tax authority, during an in-house tax audit, did not reveal errors and other contradictions in the submitted tax return, there are no grounds for demanding explanations from the taxpayer, as well as primary accounting documents.

The ban on such actions is contained in paragraph 7 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Judicial practice testifies to this (see Resolutions of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of November 11, 2008 N 7307/08, FAS of the North-Western District of August 27, 2012 N A56-52104 / 2011).

At the same time, although the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not limit the list of documents that may be required by the tax authority during an in-house tax audit, all required documents must be related to the calculation of tax amounts.

For example, statistical reporting documents do not apply to documents related to the calculation of taxes, and therefore cannot be claimed by the tax authority during a desk audit.

In addition, taking into account that the list of documents that the tax authority has the right to demand from the taxpayer to confirm the legitimacy of applying tax deductions for value added tax, provided for in Article 172 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, is not closed, the tax authority, when conducting a desk audit of the tax return on value added, in which the amount of this tax is declared to be reimbursed, has the right to demand from the taxpayer the necessary documents confirming the legality of applying tax deductions. At the same time, on the basis of the provisions of Article 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the taxpayer is obliged to comply with the legal requirements of the tax authority, including in terms of submitting documents necessary to control the calculation and payment of tax.

A similar position is set out in the Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 1, 2011 N 03-07-08 / 302.

Paragraph 25 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of July 30, 2013 N 57 "On Certain Issues Arising from the Application by Arbitration Courts of Part One of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" states that, as follows from the provisions of Chapter 21 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, including Article 176, the application in a specific tax return for value added tax, the right to a refund of this tax means that in this declaration the amount of tax deductions presented by the taxpayer exceeds the total amount of tax calculated by him on transactions recognized as an object of taxation, and that the difference between these amounts is subject to return (offset) taxpayer.

Taking into account the interrelated interpretation of the above norms, the courts need to keep in mind that not all value added tax declarations fall under paragraph 8 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, but only those that involve the return (offset) to the taxpayer of the relevant funds.

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not contain such a thing as a repeated desk audit. At the same time, a desk tax audit for the same reporting (tax) period is possible if the taxpayer submits an updated tax return.

Consequently, a desk audit may be repeated for the same tax reporting (tax) period only if an updated declaration has been filed for that period. The law does not provide for other cases for such a re-examination.

This conclusion is supported by both official bodies (see Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated May 31, 2007 N 03-02-07 / 1-267), and the courts (see Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated August 20, 2007, August 27, 2007 N KA-A40 /8177-07).

In the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga-Vyatka District of December 17, 2012 N A43-8566 / 2012, the court concluded that the actions of the tax authority to make a decision based on the results of a desk tax audit of the primary tax return when the entrepreneur submits an updated tax return with appropriate adjustments do not comply with clause 9.1 of Article 88 NK RF.

The same information in tax declarations filed by a taxpayer for the same tax period, but at different times, does not deprive the tax authority of the right to carry out independent desk audits in respect of each of the submitted declarations in the procedure and terms provided for in Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as well as to identify various circumstances and other evidence. At the same time, the norms of the legislation of the Russian Federation on taxes and fees do not provide for rules on prejudice in relation to the circumstances established by the tax authority within the framework of an earlier desk audit.

A similar conclusion was reached by the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District in Resolution No. A56-22357/2011 dated January 24, 2012.

The very fact of filing an amended tax return after the deadline established by the Tax Code of the Russian Federation for filing a declaration is not a tax offense.

At the same time, the deadlines for submitting revised declarations are not established by tax legislation, nor are the circumstances that exclude the taxpayer from being held liable on the basis of Article 119 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation for late submission of the originally filed tax return in connection with the submission of the revised declaration.

The amount of the fine in such a situation is calculated on the basis of the amount of tax actually payable to the budget, that is, on the basis of the data specified in the revised tax return, or on the basis of data from the results of an in-house tax audit of the revised tax return. And the number of days of non-submission of a tax return in this case is calculated from the day following the day of the expiration of the deadline for its submission, until the submission of the originally filed tax return, since it is precisely its untimely submission that is a tax offense.

This position follows from the analysis of the Letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia dated April 1, 2009 N ШС-22-7 / [email protected] and Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated November 15, 2011 N 7265/11.

If, before the end of the in-house tax audit, the taxpayer submits an amended tax return (calculation) in the manner prescribed by Article 81 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the in-house tax audit of the previously filed declaration (calculation) is terminated and a new in-house tax audit begins on the basis of the amended tax declaration (calculation) .

For the purposes of applying paragraph 9.1 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the legislator gives the concept of "end of verification" a different meaning. In this case, the end of the audit is understood not as the literal end of the actions that the tax authority performs before drawing up the audit act, but the complete completion of all audit actions ending in the adoption of a decision, since it makes no sense to continue all actions in relation to the tax return that was specified by the taxpayer.

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District, in Resolution No. A40-6180 / 12-99-34 of September 24, 2012, adheres to a similar point of view.

In the course of an in-house tax audit, a tax authority sending a revised tax return notice containing an indication of the errors made by the taxpayer and the need to correct them is legal, since, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the tax authority must inform the taxpayer about this if an error is discovered and offer to pay changes to the declaration.

As indicated by the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court in Decree N 13920/07 of 11.03.2008 and the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District in Decree N A66-376/2012 of 19.09.2012, having discovered errors in the declaration (contradictions in documents), the tax authority is obliged to send the taxpayer a request to submit clarifications and consider the clarifications submitted within the term of the desk audit.

However, the law does not provide for such a consequence of non-compliance by the tax authority with paragraph 3 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation as the unconditional recognition of the decision as invalid (see Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated May 20, 2009 N KA-A41 / 3793-09).

Note that the provisions of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation are of a general nature in comparison with the provisions of Article 176.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which regulates the payment of VAT. The norm of paragraph 9.1 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the termination of an in-house tax audit of the initial tax declaration means the termination of all actions of the tax authority in relation to this declaration, including actions to refund VAT, does not deprive the tax authority of the right to take into account the tax refunded under the initial tax declaration, when making decisions based on the results of the audit of the revised tax return. Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not regulate the actions of the tax authority if it decides to refund VAT before the end of the tax audit of the declaration, the possibility of which is provided for by Article 176.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

This position is confirmed by judicial practice (see Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District of June 19, 2012 N A52-3856 / 2011).

As noted by the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in Determination of December 11, 2012 N VAC-13366/12, paragraph 24 of Article 176.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for the possibility of partial cancellation of the decision to refund the amount of tax claimed for reimbursement in a declarative manner when submitting an updated tax return. Such a decision is canceled completely, which is consistent with the provisions of paragraph 9.1 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation,
The Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court dated March 11, 2008 N 13920/07 states that the direction by the tax authority during an in-house tax audit of an updated tax return notice containing an indication of errors made by the taxpayer and the need to correct them is legal.

At the same time, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District, in Resolution N KA-A41 / 3793-09 of May 20, 2009, concluded that, indeed, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the tax authority must inform the taxpayer about this if an error is detected and propose to make changes. In this case, the tax authority did not send a notice to the organization about the unlawful application of the deduction and the need to amend the declaration. However, the law does not provide for such a consequence of non-compliance by the tax authority with paragraph 3 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation as the unconditional recognition of the decision as invalid. Since the fact of the unjustified application of the deduction and arrears has been established, the decisions to refuse tax refunds and to hold liable are legal.

In the Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District dated 10.10.2012 N A25-789 / 2011, it was explained that the fact that the provisions of paragraph 9.1 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for the possibility of conducting a desk tax audit in accordance with the established procedure in relation to the primary tax return in the event that a taxpayer submits revised declaration before the end of the desk tax audit, does not indicate that tax liability on the basis of Article 126 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation for late submission of documents requested by the inspection in such a situation does not occur.

A different interpretation of the provisions of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation implies an unreasonable exemption from tax liability of taxpayers who submit documents necessary for a tax audit in violation of the deadlines. A similar legal position is set out in the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated November 15, 2011 N 7265/11.

Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation defines a desk tax audit as an audit of the law on taxes and fees based on the declaration and documentation that the payer submitted to the tax service. In addition, Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation determines the procedure for conducting a desk tax audit.

At the beginning of a desk audit, the taxpayer submits a declaration or calculation to the Federal Tax Service. To fulfill it, you do not need any special decision of the management of the tax service or the permission of the taxpayer. The latter is not notified that the scan has started. Three months are allotted for it after the declaration is submitted to the tax authority. If during the audit discrepancies, errors or inconsistencies in the data were found, the tax service will notify the audited company about this and require an explanation or correction in the declaration.

When a Request for Clarification or Correction is Submitted

The tax inspector may, during a desk audit, detect errors, discrepancies or inaccuracies. In this case, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, he must send the relevant requirements to the taxpayer.

Explanations to the declaration may be provided in writing by mail, personal delivery or using telecommunication channels using an electronic signature. Five working days from the receipt of the request are given for their submission.

If necessary, make adjustments to the declarations by submitting an updated declaration. During a desk audit, the tax inspectorate may request additional data or documents from the taxpayer:

information about benefits;

data on the amount of VAT to be reimbursed;

a personal income tax or corporate tax declaration was submitted by a participant in a partnership or investment agreement;

reporting is provided on tax liabilities that are associated with the use of natural resources.

Key features of a desk tax audit

In accordance with Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a desk tax audit is different:

verification is performed when submitting a declaration to the Federal Tax Service, however, it can be carried out without it;

cameral control is carried out in the tax service, but it is possible to visit the tax payer in order to inspect his property;

the duration of the verification cannot exceed 3 months;

conducting an audit is the responsibility of the tax system, therefore it does not require special permits;

if no questions arise on the report, then no documents will be drawn up on the verification;

the verification consists in checking the literacy of the use of benefits and rates, arithmetic control, reconciliation with the reports of other tax payers, comparing the information of the audited report, as well as linking it with other information available to the tax service;

if any errors are found or suspicions arise that the tax base is understated, then the taxpayer will be required to make changes to the report or provide explanations. Sometimes you need to submit primary documentation;

if questions remain and a violation is proven, then the IFTS is given ten days to check, after which an act will be drawn up;

if explanations are provided, the tax office may decide to terminate the audit;

the same report is not allowed to be double-checked by the chamber camera.

Who will be affected by the audit

It will affect the following economic entities:

persons who work under a simplified system;

tax agents;

taxpayers for those fiscal fees that they should pay;

organizations that may not pay VAT, in cases where they issue an invoice with value added tax;

persons who pay VAT when cooperating in the Customs Union.

Consequences of refusal to submit a declaration

Article 88 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a cameral tax audit establishes that if a declaration is submitted later than the deadline, this is equated to failure to submit a declaration. This can cause the following consequences:

Penalty 5% of the amount of tax, which is indicated in the declaration, for all months after its submission (even incomplete ones). The minimum amount is 1 thousand rubles, the maximum is 30% of the tax. The Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes a fine of 300-500 rubles for the head.

Ten working days after the deadline for submitting the report, but not later than three years after them, all operations on the accounts are terminated. This restriction will be lifted immediately after the filing of the declaration.

The VAT declaration must be sent through the TCS, if this requirement is violated, a fine of 200 rubles is imposed. The head will have to pay a fine of 300 to 500 rubles.

Conducting a desk audit without a declaration according to the information that the tax service has. When the declaration is submitted, the verification will end. However, the information obtained during it will be used in the analysis of this report. Upon completion of such an audit before receiving the declaration, then the decision made on it will be binding on the taxpayer.

Powers of the tax inspectorate during cameral events

When conducting a desk audit, IFTS employees can:

request documentation and explanations from the audited person or organization;

require documents from other persons (including foreign banks and states), they can be requested throughout the transaction chain;

conduct an inventory of property;

interrogate witnesses;

inspect objects, documentation, territories and premises.

The request can be sent by mail, by TKS or handed over to the person against signature.

How to submit documents upon request?

With the advent of electronic circulation of documents, the audited companies have the opportunity to send documents to the tax service in several ways:

Deliver directly in the form of a letter, which is accompanied by certified copies of the required supporting papers.

Send copies of documents by mail, it contains an inventory of attachments.

Send documentation on the TCS, but this can only be done in relation to the primary documentation that was received from the counterparty in electronic form, and documentation for which the electronic form is valid: additional sheets to the book of purchases and sales, these books directly, invoice journals, other documents before being sent for verification by the traditional method.

It is an important expenditure part of the activity of each organization. The page tells how to check the transport tax by TIN of an individual and in other ways. And it describes in detail about liability for violation of tax laws.

Article 88

• checked today
• code dated 01.01.2020
• entered into force on 01.01.1999

There are no new versions of the article that have not entered into force.

Compare with the version of the article dated 12/27/2017 01/01/2017 06/02/2016 05/05/2016 06/08/2015 01/01/2015 01/01/2014 01/01/2012 01/01/2009 01/01/2007 08/17/1999

An in-house tax audit is carried out at the location of the tax authority on the basis of tax declarations (calculations) and documents submitted by the taxpayer, as well as other documents on the activities of the taxpayer, available to the tax authority. A special declaration submitted in accordance with the Federal Law "On the Voluntary Declaration by Individuals of Assets and Accounts (Deposits) in Banks and on Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation", and (or) the documents and (or) information attached to it, and also, the information contained in the specified special declaration and (or) documents cannot be the basis for conducting a desk tax audit.

An in-house tax audit of the calculation of the financial result of an investment partnership is carried out by the tax authority at the place of registration of the participant in the investment partnership agreement - the managing partner responsible for maintaining tax records (hereinafter in this article - the managing partner responsible for maintaining tax records).

When submitting a tax declaration (calculation) for the tax (reporting) period for which tax monitoring is carried out, a desk tax audit is not carried out, except for the following cases:

• 1) submission of a tax declaration (calculation) later than July 1 of the year following the period for which tax monitoring is carried out;
• 2) submission of a value added tax return, in which the right to a tax refund is declared, or an excise tax return, in which the amount of excise to be reimbursed is declared;
• 3) submission of an amended tax return (calculation), in which the amount of tax payable to the budgetary system of the Russian Federation is reduced or the amount of the resulting loss is increased in comparison with the previously submitted tax declaration (calculation);
• 4) early termination of tax monitoring.

An in-house tax audit is carried out by authorized officials of the tax authority in accordance with their official duties without any special decision of the head of the tax authority within three months from the date of submission by the taxpayer of the tax declaration (calculation) (within six months from the date of submission by a foreign organization, which is based on accounting with a tax authority in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code, a tax return for value added tax), unless otherwise provided by this paragraph.

If a tax declaration (calculation) is not submitted by a taxpayer - the controlling person of an organization recognized as such in accordance with Chapter 3.4 of this Code, or by a foreign organization subject to registration with a tax authority in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code, to the tax body within the established period, authorized officials of the tax authority have the right to conduct a desk tax audit based on the documents (information) they have about the taxpayer, as well as data on other similar taxpayers within three months (within six months for a foreign organization subject to registration on accounting with a tax authority in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code) from the date of expiration of the deadline for submission of such a tax declaration (calculation) established by the legislation on taxes and fees.

If before the end of the in-house tax audit of the documents (information) available to the tax authority, the taxpayer submits a tax declaration, the in-house tax audit is terminated and a new in-house tax audit begins on the basis of the submitted tax declaration. The termination of a desk tax audit means the termination of all actions of the tax authority in relation to the documents (information) held by the tax authority. At the same time, documents (information) received by the tax authority as part of the terminated in-house tax audit may be used in carrying out tax control measures in relation to the taxpayer.

An in-house tax audit based on a value added tax return, documents submitted to the tax authority, as well as other documents on the activities of the taxpayer held by the tax authority, is carried out within two months from the date of submission of such a tax return (within six months from date of submission by a foreign organization registered with a tax authority in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code, a tax return for value added tax).

If, before the end of the in-house tax audit of the value-added tax return, the tax authority establishes signs indicating a possible violation of the legislation on taxes and fees, the head (deputy head) of the tax authority has the right to decide to extend the period for conducting an in-house tax audit. The deadline for an in-house tax audit may be extended up to three months from the date of submission of the value added tax return (with the exception of an in-house tax audit of a value added tax return submitted by a foreign organization registered with a tax authority in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code).

If a desk tax audit reveals errors in the tax declaration (calculation) and (or) contradictions between the information contained in the submitted documents, or discrepancies between the information provided by the taxpayer and the information contained in the documents held by the tax authority and received by him during the tax control, the taxpayer is informed about this with the requirement to provide the necessary explanations within five days or to make the appropriate corrections within the prescribed period.

When conducting an in-house tax audit on the basis of an amended tax declaration (calculation), in which the amount of tax payable to the budget system of the Russian Federation is reduced in comparison with the previously submitted tax declaration (calculation), the tax authority has the right to require the taxpayer to submit within five days necessary explanations justifying the change in the relevant indicators of the tax declaration (calculation).

When conducting a desk tax audit of a tax declaration (calculation) in which the amount of the loss received in the relevant reporting (tax) period is declared, the tax authority has the right to require the taxpayer to provide the necessary explanations within five days justifying the amount of the loss received.

Taxpayers who are obliged by this Code to submit a tax return for value added tax in electronic form, when conducting a desk tax audit of such a tax return, submit the explanations provided for in this paragraph in electronic form via telecommunication channels through an electronic document management operator in the format established by federal executive body authorized to control and supervise taxes and fees. When submitting the specified explanations on paper, such explanations are not considered submitted.

If a foreign organization subject to registration with a tax authority in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code fails to submit a tax return on value added tax within 30 calendar days from the date of expiration of the established deadline for its submission, the tax authority sends a notification to such an organization about the need to file such a tax return. The form and format of the said notification shall be approved by the federal executive body authorized to exercise control and supervision in the field of taxes and fees.

A taxpayer who submits explanations to the tax authority regarding the identified errors in the tax declaration (calculation), contradictions between the information contained in the submitted documents, changes in the relevant indicators in the submitted revised tax declaration (calculation), in which the amount of tax payable to the budget system of the Russian Federation is reduced Federation, as well as the amount of the resulting loss, has the right to additionally submit to the tax authority extracts from the tax and (or) accounting registers and (or) other documents confirming the accuracy of the data entered in the tax declaration (calculation).

The person conducting a cameral tax audit is obliged to consider the explanations and documents submitted by the taxpayer. If, after considering the submitted explanations and documents, or in the absence of explanations from the taxpayer, the tax authority establishes the fact of a tax offense or other violation of the legislation on taxes and fees, officials of the tax authority are required to draw up an audit report in the manner prescribed by Article 100 of this Code.

When conducting a desk tax audit, the tax authority has the right to demand from the taxpayer-organization or from the taxpayer-individual entrepreneur to provide the necessary explanations about transactions (property) for which tax benefits are applied within five days, and (or) to demand documents from these taxpayers in the prescribed manner confirming their right to such tax benefits.

When conducting a desk tax audit, a tax authority is not entitled to demand additional information and documents from a taxpayer, unless otherwise provided by this Article or unless the submission of such documents together with a tax declaration (calculation) is provided for by this Code.

When filing a tax return for value added tax, in which the right to a tax refund is declared, a desk tax audit is carried out taking into account the specifics provided for in this paragraph, on the basis of tax returns and documents submitted by the taxpayer in accordance with this Code.

The tax authority has the right to demand from the taxpayer documents confirming, in accordance with Article 172 of this Code, the legitimacy of applying tax deductions.

If contradictions are identified between the information on transactions contained in the value added tax tax return, or if there is a discrepancy between the information on transactions contained in the value added tax tax return submitted by the taxpayer, and the information on these transactions contained in the tax return on tax on value added, submitted to the tax authority by another taxpayer (another person who, in accordance with Chapter 21 of this Code, is obliged to submit a tax return on value added tax), or in the register of received and issued invoices submitted to the tax body by a person who, in accordance with Chapter 21 of this Code, is entrusted with the corresponding obligation, if such contradictions, inconsistencies indicate an understatement of the amount of value added tax payable to the budget system of the Russian Federation, or on the overstatement of the amount of value added tax claimed for reimbursement, the tax authority is also entitled to demand from the taxpayer invoices, primary and other documents related to these operations.

When conducting a desk tax audit of a tax declaration (calculation) on corporate income tax, personal income tax of a participant in an investment partnership agreement, the tax authority has the right to demand from him information on the period of his participation in such an agreement, on the share of profit (expenses, losses) attributable to him ) investment partnership, as well as use any information about the activities of the investment partnership available to the tax authority.

When conducting a desk tax audit on the basis of an updated tax declaration (calculation) submitted after two years from the date set for filing a tax declaration (calculation) for the relevant tax for the relevant reporting (tax) period, in which the amount of tax payable in the budget system of the Russian Federation, or the amount of the resulting loss has been increased in comparison with the previously submitted tax declaration (calculation), the tax authority has the right to demand from the taxpayer primary and other documents confirming the change in information in the relevant indicators of the tax declaration (calculation), and analytical registers of tax accounting, on the basis of which the specified indicators are formed before and after their changes.

When conducting an in-house tax audit of an excise tax return in which the tax deductions provided for by Article 200 of this Code are declared in connection with the return by the buyer to the taxpayer of previously sold excisable goods (with the exception of alcoholic and (or) excisable alcohol-containing products), the excise tax return submitted in connection with the return by a taxpayer - a producer of alcoholic and (or) excisable alcohol-containing products of ethyl alcohol to a supplier - a producer of ethyl alcohol, of an excise tax declaration reflecting tax deductions of excise amounts paid by the taxpayer when importing excisable goods into the territory of the Russian Federation, subsequently used as raw materials for the production of excisable goods, the tax authority has the right to demand from the taxpayer primary and other documents confirming the return of excisable goods and the legitimacy of applying the said tax deductions, with the exception of documents previously submitted to the tax authorities on other grounds.

When conducting a desk tax audit of a tax declaration for value added tax, the tax authority has the right to demand from a foreign organization registered in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of Article 83 of this Code, documents (information) confirming that the place of provision of services specified in paragraph 1 of Article 174.2 of this Code, the territory of the Russian Federation is recognized, as well as other information (information) regarding such services.

When conducting a desk tax audit of the calculation of insurance premiums, the tax authority has the right to demand from the payer of insurance premiums, in accordance with the established procedure, information and documents confirming the validity of the reflection of amounts not subject to insurance premiums and the application of reduced rates of insurance premiums.

When conducting an in-house tax audit of a tax return for value added tax, in which the tax deductions provided for in paragraph 4.1 of Article 171 of this Code are declared, the tax authority has the right to demand from the taxpayer documents confirming the legality of applying the specified tax deductions, in case of discrepancy between those reflected in the tax return information about such tax deductions to information available to the tax authority.

When conducting an in-house tax audit of a corporate income tax return claiming an investment tax deduction provided for in Article 286.1 of this Code, the tax authority has the right to require the taxpayer to provide the necessary explanations within five days regarding the application of the investment tax deduction, and (or) demand, in accordance with the established procedure, from the taxpayer primary and other documents confirming the legality of applying such a tax deduction.

When conducting a desk tax audit on taxes related to the use of natural resources, the tax authorities have the right, in addition to the documents specified in paragraph 1 of this article, to demand from the taxpayer other documents that are the basis for the calculation and payment of such taxes.

If, before the end of the in-house tax audit, the taxpayer has submitted an amended tax return (calculation) in the manner prescribed by Article 81 of this Code, the in-house tax audit of the previously filed declaration (calculation) is terminated and a new in-house tax audit begins on the basis of the amended tax declaration (calculation) . The termination of a desk tax audit means the termination of all actions of the tax authority in relation to the previously filed tax declaration (calculation). At the same time, documents (information) received by the tax authority as part of the terminated in-house tax audit may be used in carrying out tax control measures in relation to the taxpayer.

The rules provided for by this article also apply to payers of fees, payers of insurance premiums, tax agents, other persons who are obliged to submit a tax declaration (calculation), unless otherwise provided by this Code.

An in-house tax audit of a consolidated group of taxpayers is carried out in the manner prescribed by this article, on the basis of tax declarations (calculations) and documents submitted by the responsible participant in this group, as well as other documents on the activities of this group, available to the tax authority.

When conducting an in-house tax audit of a consolidated group of taxpayers, a tax authority has the right to demand from the responsible participant in this group copies of documents that must be submitted with a tax return for corporate income tax for a consolidated group of taxpayers in accordance with Chapter 25 of this Code, including those relating to activities other members of the audited group.

Necessary explanations and documents on the consolidated group of taxpayers shall be submitted to the tax authority by the responsible member of this group.

When conducting a desk tax audit of a tax declaration (calculation) submitted by a taxpayer - a participant in a regional investment project, for taxes, in the calculation of which tax benefits were used, provided for participants in regional investment projects by this Code and (or) laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the tax authority has the right demand from such a taxpayer information and documents confirming the compliance of the indicators of the implementation of a regional investment project with the requirements for regional investment projects and (or) their participants established by this Code and (or) the laws of the relevant constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

An in-house tax audit of the calculation of insurance premiums, in which the expenses for the payment of insurance coverage for compulsory social insurance in case of temporary disability and in connection with maternity are declared, is carried out taking into account the provisions established by Chapter 34 of this Code.