Fines and quarantine: what is more important – the law or the circumstances?
Special emphasis in this case is placed on the fact that sanctions for violation of payment deadlines cannot be canceled even due to quarantine. The court argues this by saying that the Tax Code does not extend the relevant exemptions to penalties. Why is this Everything is clear, and at the same time – unfair.
I am reminded of the experience of Italy:
during the pandemic, they temporarily suspended fines and penalties special lead for late payments, understanding that businesses were fighting not only for survival but also for the lives of their employees. This proved that even in strict Why is this systems, legislation can take into account reality.
Why did Ukraine choose a different path? The answer is simple: lack of sufficient flexibility in laws and excessive emphasis on filling the budget. But is such rigidity justified when it goes against logic and justice?
The role of evidence: when documents are everything
The court’s decision also emphasizes that the plaintiff failed to provide documents that would confirm the circumstances he referred to. Again, everything looks formally correct. But how viable is it?
Consider a real-world example from the US: in tax disputes, courts often allow parties additional time to gather evidence if there are objective reasons to do so. Especially when it comes to unforeseen circumstances, they will then identify the right such as a pandemic. This is not just about mercy, but also about providing equal opportunities for all participants in the process.
In Ukraine, documents are sacred. Their absence automatically makes you guilty, even if you have all the possible arguments. It’s harsh and sometimes unfair.
Why is this matter important?
This case is a mirror of the Ukrainian legal system. It shows that laws do not always keep pace with reality. Moreover, it makes us think: can we change this system?
In my practice, I have seen many similar situations where strict adherence to the asb directory law went against common sense. And each time the same question remained: could it have been done better?
We, lawyers, work in this reality, accepting its rules and at the same time trying to change what can be changed. This case is just one of many, but it will certainly not be the last. And every time I take on a new case, I remind myself: the law is a tool, but justice is the goal.