Let's consider two situations:
1. A seller tried to register a tax voucher. The registration of the tax voucher was suspended. A seller received an electronic receipt, in which it was proposed to provide additional documents. A seller does not provide additional documents to the tax authorities.
Unfortunately, in such a situation, the buyer can not directly appeal to the administrative court to recognize the actions of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine (hereinafter - GFS of Ukraine) as unlawful, in accordance with paragraph 7 of paragraph 201.16.3 of the Tax Code of Ukraine.

The law allows to appeal against not a receipt for suspending the registration of the tax voucher, but a decision to register or refuse to register the tax vaucher/calculation of the adjustment. In this case, it is necessary to apply to the commercial court with a lawsuit to obligate the seller to perform certain actions and to submit explanations to the commission of the State Fiscal Serivce of Ukraine with additional documents.

What is the jurisdiction of the dispute?
The case shall be held in the commercial court at the legal address of the defendant (seller of goods/services). Having received the lawsuit, most likely, the seller-defendant will not wait for a decision of the commercial court and will submit explanations and additional documents to the commission of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine through the state tax inspectorate of its district. I underline that such disputes shall be held not in the administrative court. The plaintiff shall apply to the commercial court.
* * * * *

2. A seller tried to register a tax voucher. The registration of the tax voucher was stopped. A seller submitted additional explanations and documents to the commission of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine and received a decision to refuse to register a tax voucher. The seller does not filed a lawsuit to the court to revoke the decision to refuse to register the tax voucher.
In this case, the buyer of the goods/services must apply as a plaintiff to the district administrative court with a lawsuit for recognizing the decision of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine as illegal and to cancel it. In the statement of claim, you should indicate the seller of the goods/services as a third party.

How to justify your claim?
In the statement of claim to the buyer of goods/services, it is necessary to substantiate their claim by the fact that the decision of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine to refuse to register a tax voucher of the seller violates the buyer's right to receive a tax credit that he may receive in accordance with the provisions of article. 201.10 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, namely. We recommend to include in the statement of claim the following articles:

paragraph 201.10 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, which says that when performing operations for the supply of goods/services, the taxpayer - the seller of goods/services is obliged to draw up a tax voucher in a timely manner, register it in the Unified Register of Tax Vouchers and provide the buyer at his request. A tax voucher drawn up and registered in the Unified Tax Voucher Registry by a taxpayer performing operations for the supply of goods/services is the basis for the buyer of such goods/services to calculate the amounts of tax relating to a tax credit.

paragraph 18 of paragraph 201.10 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, which says that the absence of the fact of registration by the tax payer - the seller of goods/services of tax invoices in the Unified Register of Tax Vouchers does not entitle the buyer to include amounts of value added tax in the tax credit and does not relieve the seller of the obligation to include the amount of the value added tax specified in the tax voucher in the amount of tax liabilities for the corresponding reporting period.

Why the plaintiff, and not the third party?
We recommend a buyer of goods/services to refer in the statement of claim to the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 53 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as KAPU), which indicates that a third person can file a claim against one or both parties of the proceedings (the plaintiff and/or the respondent) only after the legal proceedings have been initiated. Part 1. Article 53 of the KAPU does not provide a third party with the right to file a claim independently to any of the parties before the case was not started by a plaintiff. It is also necessary to indicate in the statement of claim that the plaintiff will be replaced at the first court session. Such a claim will be accepted by the court.

What should I do at the first hearing?
According to Part 1 of Art. 52 KAPU the court of the first instance, having established that the claim was addressed not by the person who has the right of claim, or not to the person who must answer for the claim, may, with the consent of the plaintiff, allow the original plaintiff or defendant to be replaced by the proper plaintiff or the defendant, if this does not entail a change in the jurisdiction of the administrative case.
After the commencement of the proceedings, and taking into account the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 52 KASU, to replace the plaintiff with a proper one, it is necessary to file a petition at the first court session. The court, in agreement with the buyer of the goods/services, who filed the claim as a plaintiff, will be able to replace him with another person, namely, the seller of the goods who was refused to register the tax voucher, and the procedural status of the buyer of the goods will be replaced from the plaintiff by a third person who declares independent claims for the dispute.
* * * * *
Thus, buyers of goods/services will be able to protect their rights in case of inaction of sellers when they are refused to register tax vouchers in the Unified Register of Tax Invoices.

Artem Sereda
tax adviser
allTax
legal and tax advisers