Objectively non-existent invoices: acquittal – Court of Milan
Summary
An entrepreneur was acquitted by the Court of Milan of the charge of issuing invoices for non-existent transactions due to lack of specific intent.
Key Points
- An entrepreneur was fully acquitted by the Court of Milan of the charge of issuing invoices for objectively non-existent transactions (Article 8 of Legislative Decree 74/2000).
- The judgment reiterates that for the crime to be configured, proof of specific intent is essential, i.e., the intention to enable third parties to evade taxes.
- The operational detachment of the defendant and the total delegation of accounting and tax management to third parties were decisive in excluding his criminal liability.
- The absence of a written contract or traceable payments is not sufficient to demonstrate the non-existence of the transaction beyond any reasonable doubt.
With a judgment dated March 21, 2022, the Criminal Court of Milan – II Section fully acquitted an entrepreneur accused of the crime of issuing invoices for objectively non-existent transactions (Article 8 of Legislative Decree 74/2000), for the tax years 2015 and 2017.
According to the prosecution, the defendant had issued two invoices totaling over 265,000 euros, in order to allow another company to evade VAT through the undue deduction of tax related to transactions that never actually occurred.
Reconstruction of the facts and the acquittal outcome
The charges originated from an investigation by the Guardia di Finanza into an alleged fraudulent scheme based on the issuance of fictitious tax documents, the absence of real bank movements, and the non-existence of contracts or commercial agreements between the two companies involved.
However, the Court excluded the configurability of the crime, ordering the acquittal of the defendant. In particular:
- awareness of the non-existent nature of the transactions was not demonstrated;
- it emerged that accounting and tax management was entirely entrusted to third parties, unrelated to direct entrepreneurial activity;
- the judge held that the defendant did not contribute, not even by way of eventual intent, to the commission of the alleged act.
Legal principles affirmed in the judgment
Specific intent is an indispensable element
The ruling reiterates that criminal liability for issuing false invoices requires proof of specific intent: the intention to enable others to evade taxes, and intent cannot be inferred from mere accounting automatisms or objective liability.
The non-existence of the transaction must be proven beyond any reasonable doubt
The judge clarified that the mere non-payment of the consideration, the absence of bank traceability, or a written contract are not in themselves sufficient to constitute the objective falsity of the invoice, if not accompanied by unequivocal evidence of simulation.
No liability without effective management capacity
In the present case, the operational detachment of the defendant was recognized, who formally held the position of legal representative but did not exercise any decision-making power or directly manage the company's accounting.
A relevant judgment for criminal tax defense
The decision of the Court of Milan is part of the most recent jurisprudence on tax crimes related to false invoices, definitively clarifying that the mere formal holding of the position is not sufficient to establish criminal liability. The good faith of the subject and the fiduciary delegation to third parties must be carefully evaluated by the judge, applying the principle of favor rei also in verifying specific intent in the case of complex evasion schemes.
Content drafted with the support of artificial intelligence tools and reviewed by the firm’s lawyers. More information
Attached Documents
Avv. Antonio Francesco Catanzariti
Legal Aid Italia
Ha letto l'articolo e ha bisogno di assistenza?
Lo Studio Legal Aid è a disposizione per una consulenza riservata. Risposta garantita entro 24 ore.
Legal Insight
Altri articoli dello Studio
Mandato di arresto europeo (MAE): radicamento in Italia e rifiuto della consegna
La Cassazione ribadisce che il termine dei cinque anni non è un dato orientativo ma una soglia legale, e che la sua verifica documentale resta terreno del giudice di merito.
LeggiConfisca a metà: la Cassazione boccia la doppia motivazione su profitto e sproporzione
Cass. pen., Sez. IV, 9 giugno 2026 (dep. 8 settembre 2026), n. 33026. La contraddizione tra confisca diretta e confisca per sproporzione è vizio autonomo, anche quando l'importo in gioco è modesto.
LeggiSequestro su rogatoria estera: l'art. 724 c.p.p. alla prova della Corte costituzionale
L'ordinanza del dott. Roberto Crepaldi, giudice per le indagini preliminari presso il Tribunale di Milano, apre la questione di legittimità costituzionale: manca un rimedio per contestare i.
Leggi