Conviction for Failing to Present Books Based on Defective Service Overturned

Ankara Regional Court of Appeal, 19th Criminal Chamber

A signature made in your name by a hand you may never have seen in your life; a name entered at your MERNİS address with the note “permanent employee”. And because of that signature you find yourself under threat of imprisonment for not presenting your books. That was precisely the issue in my client’s file.

According to the allegation, the 2017 and 2018 books had been requested, service had been effected, and no reply had been given. The court of first instance found the offence proven and deferred the announcement of the judgment. Yet my client had been saying the same thing from the start; the notice had never reached him. I appealed the deferred judgment on that ground.

At the root of the offence of failing to present books and documents lies a request made in due form. If that request did not duly reach the taxpayer, the ground on which the offence is built collapses. The Chamber pointed to exactly this; was the address at which service was effected a residence or a workplace? Was the person who signed really the defendant’s employee? If so, why was he never once heard as a witness? A judgment entered without these questions being asked rests on insufficient investigation; it was overturned and returned to the court.

The real danger in tax criminal law is form overshadowing substance. Service of process is the thin thread between the state and the citizen; if that thread breaks, every judgment built on it is left hanging in the air.