Ukrain vs PJSC “Azot”, January 2021, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 826/17841/17

Posted on | By Courts of Ukraine | No comments
Category: Commodity Transactions, Marketing and Procurement Hubs, Tax Avoidance Schemes | Tag: , , , ,
« | »

Azot is a producer of mineral fertilizers and one of the largest industrial groups in Ukraine.

Following an audit the tax authorities concluded that Azot’s export of mineral fertilizers to a related party in Switzerland, NF Trading AG, had been priced significantly below the arm’s length price, and moreover that Azot’s import of natural gas from Russia via a related party in Cyprus, Ostchem Holding Limited, had been priced significantly above the arm’s length price. On that basis, an assessment of additional corporate income tax in the amount of 43 million UAH and a decrease in the negative value by 195 million UAH was issued.

In a decision from 2019 the Administrative Court ruled in favor of the tax authorities. This decision was then appealed by Azot to the Supreme Administrative Court.

The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the appeal and decided in favor of the tax authorities.

 

Click here for translation

 

Related Guidelines

TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.26As another example, assume a taxpayer sells 1000 tons of a product for $80 per ton to an associated enterprise in its MNE group, and at the same time sells 500 tons of the same product for $100 per ton to an independent enterprise. This case requires an evaluation of...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.25One illustrative case where adjustments may be required is where the circumstances surrounding controlled and uncontrolled sales are identical, except for the fact that the controlled sales price is a delivered price and the uncontrolled sales are made f.o.b. factory. The differences in terms of transportation and insurance generally have...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.24The CUP method is a particularly reliable method where an independent enterprise sells the same product as is sold between two associated enterprises. For example, an independent enterprise sells unbranded Colombian coffee beans of a similar type, quality, and quantity as those sold between two associated enterprises, assuming that the...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.23The following examples illustrate the application of the CUP method, including situations where adjustments may need to be made to uncontrolled transactions to make them comparable uncontrolled transactions....
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.22A particularly relevant factor for commodity transactions determined by reference to the quoted price is the pricing date, which refers to the specific time, date or time period (e.g. a specified range of dates over which an average price is determined) selected by the parties to determine the price for...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.21In order to assist tax administrations in conducting an informed examination of the taxpayer’s transfer pricing practices, taxpayers should provide reliable evidence and document, as part of their transfer pricing documentation, the price-setting policy for commodity transactions, the information needed to justify price adjustments based on the comparable uncontrolled transactions...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.20For the CUP method to be reliably applied to commodity transactions, the economically relevant characteristics of the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled transactions or the uncontrolled arrangements represented by the quoted price need to be comparable. For commodities, the economically relevant characteristics include, among others, the physical features and quality...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.19Under the CUP method, the arm’s length price for commodity transactions may be determined by reference to comparable uncontrolled transactions and by reference to comparable uncontrolled arrangements represented by the quoted price. Quoted commodity prices generally reflect the agreement between independent buyers and sellers in the market on the price...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.18Subject to the guidance in paragraph 2.2 for selecting the most appropriate transfer pricing method in the circumstances of a particular case, the CUP method would generally be an appropriate transfer pricing method for establishing the arm’s length price for the transfer of commodities between associated enterprises. The reference to...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.17In considering whether controlled and uncontrolled transactions are comparable, regard should be had to the effect on price of broader business functions other than just product comparability (i.e. factors relevant to determining comparability under Chapter I). Where differences exist between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions or between the enterprises undertaking...

Supplemental Guidance

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright 2025 TPcases