In criminal proceedings No. 83151224, which had been under investigation by the General Department for Investigation of Economic Crimes and Smuggling of the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Armenia since June 2024, public criminal prosecution was initiated on July 31, 2024, against G.E., a client represented by Andranik Mnatsakanyan, an attorney at our law firm.
G.E. was charged under Article 290, Part 3, Point 2 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia with allegedly committing a serious economic crime. Specifically, it was alleged that between 2020 and 2022, G.E. had evaded the payment of taxes in particularly large amounts, exceeding AMD 800 million, by concealing taxable objects or entering distorted information into tax returns.
During the preliminary investigation, the defense undertook numerous procedural measures aimed at protecting G.E.’s interests. In particular, through the submission of substantial and well-founded arguments during an extensive tax audit, the defense successfully demonstrated that the initial calculations prepared by the State Revenue Committee of the Republic of Armenia, indicating unpaid taxes exceeding AMD 800 million, were based on inaccurate underlying data and an erroneous calculation methodology.
As a result, it was established that the amount of taxes allegedly underpaid during the period specified in the charges against G.E. did not exceed AMD 20 million, which was subsequently paid in full.
Following a preliminary investigation lasting more than two years, on October 1, 2026, the supervising prosecutor, acting upon a motion submitted by the investigator, issued a decision to terminate the criminal prosecution against G.E. on exonerating grounds, due to the expiration of the maximum statutory time limits for criminal prosecution.
It is also noteworthy that, at the initial stage of the preliminary investigation, the Yerevan Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction (Criminal Division) had ordered G.E.’s pre-trial detention as a preventive measure.
However, as a result of numerous procedural actions undertaken to protect the accused’s interests, including the presentation of compelling arguments demonstrating that the tax liabilities specified in the charges had been incorrectly calculated, the supervising prosecutor subsequently lifted the pre-trial detention measure imposed on G.E.
Furthermore, the Criminal Court of Appeal of the Republic of Armenia overturned the first-instance court’s decision and declared the imposition of pre-trial detention on G.E. as a preventive measure unlawful (Judicial Case No. ԵԴ1/1300/06/24).
