We have been appealing tax audit appointments for many years, getting orders and instructions cancelled by higher authorities and in court. Recently, tax authorities increasingly start with a preliminary decision to initiate an audit at the level of the State Revenue Office (SRO). Only two business days are given to object. We believe it is most effective to resolve the matter at this very stage: while there is no audit order yet, it is easier to stop, and the business does not spend months on an audit and litigation.
If you have just received a desk audit notice, see the page “Desk Audit Notice Response”: an audit can often be prevented at this stage.
We examine the order, the history of relations with the tax authority, and identify all procedural and substantive violations.
We determine the optimal method of defense – administrative appeal or direct application to court, taking into account deadlines and prospects.
We request additional documents from the tax authority, form a package of supporting materials, and prepare expert opinions when necessary.
We compose a legally verified position with references to legal norms, judicial practice, and specific circumstances of the case.
We participate in all court hearings, represent the company's interests, provide explanations, and challenge the tax authority's arguments.
We achieve cancellation of the order, establish a system for preventing similar situations, and train the team on proper interaction with tax authorities.
Situation. The tax authority ordered an unscheduled thematic audit of a company’s CIT and VAT for two years. The reason: an assumption that one of its suppliers was fictitious.
Task. To cancel the instruction without waiting for the audit results.
Result. We filed an administrative claim. The court found the instruction unlawful and cancelled it: the tax authority did not present a single fact of the company violating the law, and a mere suspicion about a supplier is not enough. The court ordered the tax authority to reimburse the state fee.
Situation. The SRO issued two preliminary decisions on audits of a company: on VAT allegedly overstated as an offset on imports, and on CIT due to a discrepancy between deductions and electronic invoice data.
Task. To prevent the audits from being ordered.
Result. Within two business days we filed objections with supporting documents and requests for a hearing. The SRO terminated both administrative procedures, and no audits were ordered.
Situation. The SRO issued a preliminary decision on an audit of an agent company working with drivers on a taxi service. Based on cloud cash register data, the tax authority treated more than 30 billion tenge as the company’s income for the year, although the company’s income is only its commission.
Task. To prove the actual amount of income and prevent the audit.
Result. We filed an objection and four supplements to it with documents, took part in the hearing and filed comments on the minutes. The SRO terminated the procedure, and no audit was ordered.
It is a letter from the SRO stating that it intends to order an audit. Before the order is issued, the taxpayer has the right to file an objection and to be heard.
No later than two business days after receiving the preliminary decision. So it is best to contact us on the day you receive it.
They can be appealed to a higher tax authority or in court. The chances are higher if the tax authority has no specific facts of a violation.
Yes, throughout Kazakhstan. We file objections through the eOtinish.kz portal, so the company’s location does not matter. We attend hearings online or in person.
Preparing an objection to an SRO preliminary decision costs from 800,000 tenge. We quote the cost of appealing an order or instruction already issued, to a higher authority or in court, after reviewing the case.
Leave a request on the page or write to info@salyk.net
Ask our specially trained AI 24/7 — the widget is in the bottom-right corner.
We have already solved problems like yours
