Manipulations failed: how Yabko lost its court case against the tax authorities due to lack of evidence of Apple’s legal origin

Manipulations failed: how Yabko lost its court case against the tax authorities due to lack of evidence of Apple’s legal origin

Here, the "Yabko" network is actively issuing denials of involvement in the smuggling of Apple products worth 35 million, which were seized by customs and border guards.

These clowns are trying to convince everyone that the goods they sell are legal.
Of course, this is complete nonsense, as confirmed even by court rulings and tax authorities.

"Yabko" is attempting to present internal goods transfer documents to regulatory authorities as primary documents proving origin. But no one is buying it. Here is one of dozens of court pieces of evidence.

The Lviv Regional Administrative Court denied the claim of LLC "Specialtech" (the "Yabko" store network) against the Main Directorate of the State Tax Service in Lviv Region. The company tried to challenge a fine of 259,426 hryvnias imposed for violating the procedure for accounting for inventory.

The corresponding decision was made by the court on December 19, 2025, in case No. 380/1965/25.

The essence of the violation
In November 2024, tax officials conducted an on-site inspection of a "Yabko" store located in the city of Varash, Rivne Region. The basis for the inspection was information from the State Tax Service of Ukraine about the possible sale of smuggled ("gray") Apple equipment without proper customs clearance and tax payment.

Inspectors found that the store was selling technically complex household appliances (smartphones, headphones, etc.), for which there were no primary documents confirming their accounting and origin.

According to legislation (Clause 12, Article 3 of Law No. 265/95-VR), such documents must be provided to the regulatory authority directly at the start of the inspection at the point of sale. Their absence is an independent ground for imposing fines.

The court’s position
Representatives of LLC "Specialtech" claimed that they provided inspectors with invoices for the internal transfer of goods between the company’s warehouses. However, the court agreed with the tax authority’s arguments: internal invoices do not confirm the legal origin of the goods (i.e., they do not show from whom and on what basis the goods were initially purchased).

The company failed to provide documents regarding the receipt of equipment from suppliers or other business entities.

Judge Khoma O.P. recognized the actions of the tax service as lawful and upheld the fine. The claim of the "Yabko" network was fully denied.