Xinjiang wood industry company found false transaction key evidence in second-instance trial to disclose

Xinjiang a wood industry company (hereinafter referred to as the "wood industry company") clearly stated that as the buyer of each piece of wood sale has evidence to prove the legal origin of wood, and the transaction behavior is true and effective, but is still recognized by the tax inspection department, public security organs, the prosecutor's office, the court level as a false value added tax special invoice, the company's legal representative Mr. Liu was sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years by the Avatí County People's Court on March 18, 2025.

On August 26, the second-instance trial of the case, which was concerned by the local business and legal community, was held in the middle-level people's court in the region of Aksu. The fact that Mr. Liu and his lawyers, who had been confident in the second-instance trial, did not think about it was that the trial could not be advanced after less than two hours, and the council had only to announce the suspension of the trial, and the case would be held for the second time.

In the second-instance trial, the lawyer again asked for key evidence to go to?

The Central People's Court of Xinjiang-Aksu Region

At 11 a.m. on August 26th, the middle-level people's court in Aksu region openly held a trial in the second trial court to hear the case of the wood industry company and Mr. Liu's fake VAT special invoice. After the trial began, the judge asked the defenders in a row, and Mr. Liu said that he did not scam the state's tax and insisted that there was no tax fraud.

The defense of the court said that the wood company operated by the appellant is a legal business enterprise, mainly engaged in timber acquisition, processing and sales of timber products. In the case of VAT special invoice corresponding to each timber transaction, there are real transaction items and transaction behavior to prove that whether the wood company directly from the wood market, or through others to collect timber, there are harvest licenses, pounds, payments records and other evidence to support. while the wood company exists using other people's identity information to issue agricultural product acquisition special invoice, and the invoice from Tada some wood company to obtain the invoice, is in order to respond to the real transaction, to complete the tax deduction according to law, and not for the purpose of fake transactions, tax fraud. The

“Every piece of timber has a corresponding harvest license, and the timber of each transaction exists objectively,” said the lawyer, the applicant above the court of first instance “issued an invoice that was inconsistent with the actual business” in order to determine that it had a crime intention, carried out a criminal act, and then made a guilty judgment about it, which is the fact that it was found wrong.

When the lawyer will be able to prove the existence of the real transaction of 106 timber harvesting licenses as evidence of innocence, the prosecutor in court said: "For these evidence, we do not know the truth of falsehood, the first time we saw, why the lawyer now get out of the proof?" on this, the lawyer was quite shocked, immediately said: "These evidence in the first trial public security has already been collected in accordance with the law, and also collected twice, why did not appear in the one trial volume?

Based on this, the trial was suspended, and the prosecutors and defenders jointly reviewed the key evidence of innocence and failed to reach a consensus in the trial, the trial can only be suspended before the trial and then opened in the afternoon. At 6 p.m., the trial was announced again, but did not enter the substantive trial, and because a member of the trial could not attend the trial, the trial was suspended again and the second trial would be scheduled.

Lawyer: A real transaction belongs to a substitute, not a false in the sense of criminal law

The author visited several people familiar with Mr. Liu, who said that Mr. Liu has been engaged in the timber industry for years from Jiangsu province to Aksu region, consistently adhering to the law, being honest, upholding the bottom line, and upholding the faith.

Intermediate-level People's Court Litigation Service Center

According to the criminal judgment of the Avaty County People's Court ( 2025 ) new 2928 first sentence number 186, Avaty County People's Procuratorate accused: in 2016, until the case, the defendant Mr. Liu served as the defendant unit wood company legal person, from January 2021 to December 2023, the defendant unit in the absence of producing self-discovered agricultural products (green wood) acquisition business, for its own fake farming products purchase bills 126, with the amount of 947,6266 yuan, has depreciated the item tax of 852863.99 yuan, resulting in the city maintenance tax loss of 37625.74 yuan. From August 2022 to January 2023, the defendant unit wood company by paying the procedure fee to a certain wood industry company falsified 6 value added special invoices,

The lawyer believes that, first, the public prosecution agency has not confirmed the specific amount of the tax to be paid, there is no fact beyond the scope of "tax liability", and there is no fact that "tax was deceived"; second, according to the Supreme Law and the Supreme Prosecutor's judicial interpretation, only the false input tax greater than the amount to be paid can constitute a false value added tax special invoice crime, and the false input tax is less than the amount to be paid, can not constitute a false value added tax special invoice crime; third, in the case, the state tax has not been deceived, the false input tax does not exceed the real amount to be paid, so the defendant has not deceived the state tax; fourth, the defendant has issued the invo

One of them is a deforestation license.

Every piece of wood acquired by the timber company retains the "harvesting license" given by the seller, how can a layer breakthrough be placed in a false transaction? and the upper right corner of this picture indicates "400 yuan paid", which 400 yuan after verification is the shipping fee, the payment of the shipping fee further proves the authenticity of the transaction.

The lawyer further explained that according to the provisions of the law, the invoice for the acquisition of agricultural products is written tax-free, exempt from the sales tax of the primary agricultural products (sellers) sold by the farmer, this tax rate is 13/113, that is, if the farmer sold 113 yuan, the net income is 113 yuan, the tax of 13 yuan will not be paid, but it must be noted that the purchaser has still spent 113 yuan bought, so there is no exemption from the buyer's input tax. For the farmer (seller) the sales tax is completely exempt, the timber company as the buyer, regardless of the fact that the development ticket has not been issued, the money he paid to the seller includes input tax, the invoice invoice is included, the invoice proof

During the first trial, the trial was postponed three times, and after the first trial judgment, the public security organs were still supplementing new evidence.

During the first trial of this case, the opening trial of the Avaty County People's Court in this case has been postponed three times.

Avaty County People's Court's first trial

It is understood that the first notice of the trial was at 10:30 a.m. on October 15, 2025, but Mr. Liu's defense lawyer reflected to the people's procuratorate in the Aksu region before the trial, so the trial was "emergency suspended", which was the first delay of the trial.

The first trial was postponed to October 21, but then due to the defendant Liu's replacement of the defence lawyer, the new defence lawyer needed time to read, to protect the lawyer's defence rights, the second trial was postponed to November 11.

During this process, that is, around November 7, the lawyer found that there was one of the evidence of the prosecution’s allegations in a PDF file of more than 1G that actually contained only eight photos of the timber harvesting license (all licenses should be 106), then applied to the court to the prosecutor to collect the corresponding evidence that the police had already collected in accordance with the law during the investigation phase, but the prosecutor’s response did not have this evidence, so the prosecutor called for the police to collect, but the police insisted that they were not in their hands (note: this was the first missing without key evidence), and in turn the police called for the timber company.

On December 1, in accordance with the request of the Avaty County Public Security Bureau to collect evidence, the wood industry company submitted to the County Public Security Bureau a detailed set of evidence sufficient to prove that Mr. Liu and the company did not constitute a crime, and Chen Chen, an operator of the County Public Security Bureau, received the evidence as an operator of the group, when he issued a receipt list and signed his name to the wood industry company. But strangely enough, the evidence received by the County Public Security Bureau went unknown again. In the trial on December 9, 2025, the group of innocent evidence was not present in a trial, and no one had seen its existence. In this regard, the lawyer said: "Fortunately, when the Avaty County Public Security Bureau received this group of evidence on December 1, 2025, it issued a receipt list

On December 1, 2025, the Avaty County Public Security Bureau received a list of key evidence for timber companies.

Thirdly delayed until December 9, 2025, the case was finally officially opened for trial. Although the tax authorities had never issued a notification to the timber company and Mr. Liu for the collection of taxes, the company and Mr. Liu were still convicted by the first-instance court for the crime of misrepresentation of the value added tax special invoice. Although the defense and prosecutor have expressed their claims on the same assessment report (the defendants have made the opposite claims on the same assessment report), the defense's claims have not all been credited by the first-instance court, and the prosecutor's claims have been entirely examined by the court, and the defense considers this to be a typical "double standard".

On March 18, 2026, the Avaty County People's Court issued a new (2928) Criminal Decree No. 186 in the first sentence, ruling that Mr. Liu constituted a false VAT special invoice crime, sentenced to three years in prison, and a suspended sentence of five years.

After the judgment of the first instance, an incredible thing happened again, according to the informed person: on March 18, the case has been ruled in the first instance, and the public security organ on June 12 is still supplementing the evidence to the Avaty court, according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, all the evidence that has not been examined by the court has no evidence effect, the judicial organ can not be credited, let alone the judgment has also supplemented the evidence to the court, this is based on what consideration?

The Avaty County People's Court's first judgment

In this case, there are two mainly misunderstood points:

First, it is clear that the police have obtained sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's innocence in the investigation phase twice in accordance with the law, why not transfer it to the prosecutor's office again and again?

The second is that on March 18, this year, the first-instance court has made a verdict, why after Mr. Liu’s appeal, the public security organs are still supplementing the evidence to the first-instance court in June?

As for the final outcome of this case, as for the sacredness and fairness of the law, as for the business environment of Aksu, we believe that the people’s courts of the middle level of Aksu region can make an objective and fair decision.