Courier invoice without a receipt does not prove timely filing of a claim – appellate court

Compliance with deadlines for court appeals is a mandatory condition for the consideration of an administrative case. If the plaintiff claims to have submitted documents on time, they must provide proper evidence of this. A courier service invoice without a payment document may be insufficient. Moreover, the mere reference to martial law is not a valid reason for missing a procedural deadline — it is necessary to prove how exactly it hindered timely court appeal.

Case details

By the ruling dated 11.06.2026 in case No. 420/30269/24, the Fifth Administrative Court of Appeal partially satisfied the appeal of the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Odessa region, canceled the decision of the Odessa District Administrative Court dated 27.02.2026, and adopted a new court decision leaving the administrative claim of the Limited Liability Company without consideration.

The LLC filed a lawsuit against the State Tax Service, Main Department of the State Tax Service, seeking to recognize as unlawful and cancel the decision of the commission on suspension of registration of the tax invoice/correction calculation in the Unified Register of Tax Invoices of the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Odessa region regarding registration or refusal to register the tax invoice/correction calculation in the Unified Register of Tax Invoices and to oblige the State Tax Service of Ukraine to register the tax invoices in the Unified State Register of Tax Invoices.

The decision of the Odessa District Administrative Court dated 27.02.2026 satisfied the taxpayer's claims.

Disagreeing with this decision, the Main Department of the State Tax Service filed an appeal, which, among other things, pointed out that the court of first instance failed to give proper legal assessment to the circumstances regarding the plaintiff's missing the deadline for filing this administrative claim and did not apply the consequences provided for in Article 123 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine.

After reviewing the case materials, the panel of judges of the appellate instance noted that checking compliance with deadlines for court appeals is subject to primary clarification.

At the same time, the panel of judges of the appellate instance noted that the claim was not submitted by the plaintiff directly to the court but was handed over to a courier delivery operator (individual entrepreneur PERSON 1). The plaintiff insisted that the claim was sent on time — 27.12.2023, and the prolonged delivery (the claim reached the court only on 26.09.2024, i.e., after nine months) was due to the announcement of air raid alerts.

However, the panel of judges noted that according to the Law of Ukraine "On Postal Service" and the Rules for the Provision of Postal Services, the provision of such services must be confirmed by a payment document (cash receipt, payment voucher, etc.) of the established form. A courier service invoice without the corresponding payment document cannot be considered proper evidence of filing the claim on the specified day. The copy of the invoice available in the case materials without a payment document is not proper and sufficient evidence of court appeal on 27.12.2023.

Moreover, the copy of the cash receipt provided by the plaintiff during the appeal contained discrepancies in dates (the receipt was dated 2025, while the invoice indicated 2023). Therefore, the plaintiff did not prove the actual circumstances of filing the claim in December 2023.

In conclusion, the appellate court found that by filing this claim only in September 2024, the plaintiff missed the three-month deadline established by part 4 of Article 122 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine for appealing the Commission's decisions dated 12.09.2023, as well as the six-month deadline established by part 2 of Article 122 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine for appealing decisions dated 03.10.2023.

At the same time, the court emphasized that the plaintiff's mere reference to the introduction of martial law in Ukraine, without specifying its concrete impact on the impossibility of performing procedural actions, does not prove the existence of valid reasons for missing the deadline. The institution of deadlines in administrative proceedings promotes achieving legal certainty in public-law relations and encourages participants to act in good faith in fulfilling their obligations.

Given the absence of valid reasons for missing the deadline, the Fifth Administrative Court of Appeal canceled the decision of the court of first instance and left the administrative claim of the LLC without consideration based on paragraph 8 of part 1 of Article 240 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook page Facebook and on Instagram to stay updated on the most important events.