Payment order: everything you need to know about it

To make any money transfer, you need to fill out a special form for non-cash payment. It is presented in the form of a document with correctly filled in details. This document is called a payment order or payment order.

What is a payment order?

A payment order (PO) is a document of the established form, by which the owner of a bank account instructs the bank to carry out the required monetary transaction from his account using the specified details. It is filled out independently by the sender or at his request by the client’s bank and can be issued in two forms:

1. On A4 paper (filled out on a computer in a special program, in a Word document or pdf format).
2. In electronic form (only in a special program, not printed on paper).

There are PPs:

• One-time (for making one transfer, after which they lose their validity)
• Regular (for making systematic payments, executed by the bank after a certain period of time).

What operations can be performed through a payment order?

• Transfer of money to counterparties for work/goods.
• Transfers to budgetary and non-budgetary funds of various levels.
• Payment of loans, replenishment of deposits, etc.
• Transfer of money for purposes approved by laws, contracts or agreements.
• Making regular payments (utilities, Internet, mobile communications, etc.).

What is the time frame for execution of a payment order?

The deadlines for execution are specified in the Civil Code of Russia. If the transfer is carried out within one region or region, then the maximum processing time can reach two days. If we are talking about an interregional payment, the period can extend to 3-5 days. In practice, the order is processed on the date of its submission or within the first 24 hours.

How many copies of payment orders need to be issued?

The number of PPs is determined by the number of settlement participants. One remains in the sender's bank, the second - with the client with an acceptance mark, the rest go to the recipient's bank and counterparties.

The bank is obliged to accept the PP regardless of whether there is money in the client’s account. If there is not enough money, then the PP is executed later, as soon as funds become available. If an account overdraft agreement has been concluded, the order is processed immediately.

In cases where there are insufficient funds and the bank cannot process the payment, the PP is placed in a special storage facility for orders not paid on time.

The PP has a validity period of 10 days.

How is a payment order filled out?

In the PP you must fill in all required fields. Marks or corrections are not possible. Required fields are fields with sender and recipient details.

Main fields and features of their filling:

1. Number – numbered with numbers (maximum 6 characters from 1 to 999999).
2. Date – put in the form day.month.year (example 01/12/2015).
3. Type of payment – ​​set as a special code (example: urgent = code 1).
4. The amount in words is written with a capital letter without abbreviation, kopecks - in numbers (example: Fifteen thousand one hundred forty-two rubles 21 kopecks).
5. Amount – put in numbers, rubles from kopecks are separated by a “-” sign (example: 15142-21).
6. Payer - for a legal entity, the full name, location address is prescribed (example: LLC "Investor" // Russia, Zelenograd, Sovetskaya St., 15), and for a legal entity - full name, place of registration (example: Ivanov Alexander Vladimirovich // Russia, Krasnodar, Lenin St. 11).
7. Payer account number is the sender's account number, consisting of 20 characters (example: 40802810067100010760).
8. Payer's bank - the name and location are indicated (example: “VTB 24” CJSC, Moscow).
9. BIC – bank identification number (example: 044525716).
10. Account No. is the correspondent account number of the sending bank with the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, consists of 20 characters (example: 30101810100000000716).
11. Recipient's bank - the name and location of the bank receiving the money (example: Sberbank OJSC, Moscow).
12. BIC of the recipient's bank - is registered according to the BIC directory (example: 044525111).
13. Account number of the recipient's bank – consists of 20 digits (example: 30101810600000000886).
14. Recipient – ​​name of the addressee to receive the transfer, for legal entities – full name, for individuals – full name
15. Recipient's account number – consists of 20 characters.
16. Type of payment - is indicated by a code (example: PP = 01).
17. Payment deadline. - not filled in.
18. Name pl. - not filled in.
19. Outline of boards – numbers from 1 to 5 (in accordance with the Federal Law) or not filled in (example: 1 – payment for compensation for harm to life/health and alimony, 2 – wages, 3 – taxes, 4 – any monetary claims, 5 – other documents in dated order).
20. Code – usually indicated as 0.
21. Res.field – not filled in.
22. Purpose of payment - the purpose of the PP is specified with additional information (example: payment for goods according to invoice No. 123, VAT not regional)
23. TIN is required to be filled out, 10 digits for legal entities and 12 characters for individuals.
24. KPP – registration code, consists of 9 characters.
25. M.P. – the sender’s stamp is affixed.
26. Signatures – the sender’s signature, as in a signature card or passport.
27. Bank marks – seal and mark of a bank employee.

Signing electronic documents.

As stated above, money orders may be provided electronically. In order for an electronic order to have the same legal force as a paper one, an electronic signature is applied to it. According to 63-FZ, it is equal to handwritten.

Electronic PPs are generated in online banks when it is necessary, for example, to make a payment, and for the convenience of users they do not need to be signed, printed or taken to the bank for execution.

Often, the Arbitration Court requires that a genuine copy of the payment receipt confirming the payment of the state duty be submitted to the court, also with a note indicating that the funds have been written off, i.e. blue bank seal. But recently, many judges no longer require this, and a payment order executed by the client bank is enough for them, i.e. black and white, which I print myself. QUESTION: What guides the court when requiring a payment order with the bank’s blue seal confirming its execution? It is legal?

Answer

The court is guided by the fact that the fact of payment of the state duty by the payer in non-cash form is confirmed by a payment order with a note from the bank or the relevant territorial body of the Treasury of Russia (another body that opens and maintains accounts), including one that makes payments in electronic form, about its execution (). In practice, the execution mark is a corresponding inscription from a bank employee (another body), sealed with a round seal of the organization. Therefore, the presence of a mark on the execution of the payment order is of decisive importance in this situation; if the independently printed payment order contains it, this is enough.

The rationale for this position is given below in the materials of the “Lawyer System” .

“The state duty is paid at the location of the arbitration court to which the statement of claim is filed in cash or non-cash form ().

The fact of payment of the state duty by the payer in cash is confirmed either by a receipt of the established form issued to the payer by the bank, or by a receipt issued to the payer by an official or the cash desk of the body to which the payment was made ().

The fact of payment of the state duty by the payer in non-cash form is confirmed by a payment order with a note from the bank or the relevant territorial body of the Treasury of Russia (another body that opens and maintains accounts), including one that makes payments in electronic form, about its execution ().

In practice, the execution mark is a corresponding inscription from a bank employee (another body), sealed with a round seal of the organization. The execution mark can be placed both on the front side of the payment order and on the back. However, if there is no such mark on the payment order, the arbitration court may consider the fact of payment of the state duty unconfirmed*.”

A professional help system for lawyers in which you will find the answer to any, even the most complex, question.

A “payment” with a bank mark confirms the fulfillment of the obligation to pay taxes and fees

The company sent a letter to the inspectorate with supporting documents attached (a payment order with a bank mark and an account statement confirming a sufficient amount of funds) and reported that it had fulfilled its obligation to pay VAT.

According to subparagraph 1 of paragraph 3 of Article 45 of the Tax Code, the obligation is considered fulfilled from the moment of presentation to the bank of an order to transfer to the budget to the appropriate Federal Treasury account from a bank account if there is a sufficient cash balance on it on the day of payment.

In addition, before sending explanations to the inspectorate, the company re-paid the required amount of VAT, which, according to the inspectorate, also did not go to the budget. The company asked to offset this payment against VAT for the second quarter of 2014, which was also refused.

The taxpayer could not have known in advance before submitting the payment order that the license of the bank servicing him would be revoked.

Position of the tax authority

The inspection confirmed that the disputed amounts of money were not received in the relevant Treasury account and that in this case the taxpayer’s obligation will be considered fulfilled only if he was conscientious in transferring funds to the budget. But the taxpayer, knowing in advance that the bank’s license would soon be revoked, did not assess his risks and took upon himself the possible consequences.

The taxpayer showed imprudence, because long before the events that happened, information about the revocation of the bank’s license was published in the press.

The inspectorate also has information that the amount of tax paid does not correspond to the actual amounts payable to the budget at the end of tax periods.

The court decided

According to Article 45 of the Tax Code, the taxpayer is obliged to independently fulfill the obligation to pay taxes on time, according to the legislation on taxes and fees. At the same time, it is not prohibited to repay debts on taxes and fees in an amount greater than that required by settlement documents.

The obligation of each taxpayer to pay taxes is considered fulfilled at the moment when the seizure of part of his property, intended for payment to the budget as a tax, actually occurred (Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 12, 1998 No. 24-P).

Withdrawal of funds occurs at the moment the bank writes off the appropriate funds from the taxpayer's current account to pay the tax, which indicates payment of the tax. In this case, the taxpayer is not responsible for the actions of institutions participating in the multi-stage process of paying and transferring taxes to the budget.

The judges indicated that if the payer has the appropriate evidence, the obligation to pay the relevant tax must be recognized as fulfilled, regardless of the actual entry of the payment into the budget system of the Russian Federation.

A bank statement from the company's account confirms the presence of a sufficient cash balance in the current account to pay taxes in full.

During the proceedings, it was confirmed that the payment order was submitted by the applicant to the bank before the date of revocation of his license, which is certified by the bank’s mark on the document accepting it for execution.

Thus, the court came to the conclusion that the company’s obligation to pay the disputed amount of tax is fulfilled regardless of the actual entry of the payment into the budget system of the Russian Federation.

In connection with the letter received by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from the head of the Federal Treasury, which explains the procedure for processing payment orders submitted as documents confirming payment of state duties by budgetary institutions when these bodies file complaints with courts of general jurisdiction, the chairmen of regional and other relevant courts the courts sent out a letter dated March 26, 2007 N 2093-5/general. with a request to bring to the attention of the judges the following.

“In accordance with Article 132 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, when filing a claim in court, a document confirming payment of the state duty must be attached to the statement of claim. Similar requirements are established by Articles 322, 339, 378 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation when filing appeals, cassation, and supervisory complaints against judicial acts.

Article 333.18 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation establishes that the fact of payment of the state duty by the payer in non-cash form is confirmed by a payment order with a note from the bank about its execution. In the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated May 25, 2005 N 91 “On some issues of application by arbitration courts of Chapter 25.3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation”, arbitration courts of the Russian Federation are recommended to pay attention to the fact that evidence of payment of state duty in non-cash form is a payment order, on in which the date of debiting the funds from the payer's account is entered in the field "Written off from the payer's account" (in case of partial payment - the date of the last payment), in the field "Bank Marks" - the stamp of the bank and the signature of the responsible executor (Regulations on non-cash payments in the Russian Federation, approved Directive of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation dated October 3, 2002 N 2-P (with subsequent amendments).

ConsultantPlus: note.

There appears to be a typo in the text of the document: Instructions on the procedure for opening and maintaining personal accounts by the Federal Treasury of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation for recording transactions for the execution of federal budget expenditures were approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation N 142n, issued on December 31, 2002, and not on January 22, 2004.

Meanwhile, the procedure for opening and maintaining personal accounts by the bodies of the Federal Treasury of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation for recording operations for the execution of federal budget expenditures, approved by Order of the Minister of Finance of Russia of January 22, 2004 N 142n (hereinafter referred to as Instruction N 142n), does not provide for the submission by the bodies of the Federal Treasury to serviced clients of payment orders for the transfer of taxes, fees and other obligatory payments to the budget system of the Russian Federation with a note from the bank about their execution. N 142n provides for issuing payment documents to clients only with a mark from the Federal Treasury. The result of this contradiction is the refusal of a number of judicial bodies of some constituent entities of the Russian Federation to accept for consideration statements of claim, complaints against court decisions of budgetary institutions that have personal accounts with the Federal Treasury, without the presence of a bank mark on its execution on the payment order for payment of the state duty.

In accordance with Articles 215 and 215.1 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, cash services for the execution of budgets of the budget system of the Russian Federation are carried out by the Federal Treasury. To carry out cash services for the execution of budgets, the Federal Treasury opens accounts with the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (taking into account Article 156 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation), on which all cash transactions for the execution of budgets of the budget system of the Russian Federation are carried out.

According to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, the execution of the federal budget for expenditures is carried out using personal accounts opened in the unified accounting register of the Federal Treasury for each main manager, manager and recipient of federal budget funds.

Thus, in accordance with the budget legislation of the Russian Federation, a federal institution does not have the right to have accounts with the Bank of Russia or a credit organization (hereinafter referred to as the bank) to account for transactions with funds in the currency of the Russian Federation (with the exception of those institutions that have permission from the Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation to opening of such accounts) and only personal accounts can be opened for him in the territorial bodies of the Federal Treasury. Accordingly, the clients of Bank of Russia institutions are not federal institutions, but territorial bodies of the Federal Treasury, which maintain personal accounts of these institutions.

The features of settlement and cash services by banks for the accounts of Federal Treasury bodies in the conditions of opening personal accounts with the Federal Treasury bodies for the main managers, managers and recipients of budget funds are determined by the Bank of Russia and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated May 20, 2004 N 257-P/46n.

At the same time, the territorial bodies of the Federal Treasury carry out cash transactions with budget funds and funds received from entrepreneurial and other income-generating activities in accordance with the regulations of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation and the Bank of Russia.

In accordance with the provisions of these regulatory legal acts, payment orders for the transfer of taxes, fees and other obligatory payments to the budget system of the Russian Federation, the payers for which are budget recipients whose personal accounts are opened with the Federal Treasury, are filled out in accordance with the rules established by the Bank of Russia from October 3, 2002 No. 2-P and the Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation dated November 24, 2004 No. 106n.

According to Instruction No. 142n, the specified Federal Treasury body is authorized to put a stamp of the Federal Treasury body on all payment documents received by the Federal Treasury body indicating the date of the day on which they must be executed.

In turn, in accordance with Instruction No. 142n, the Federal Treasury body, no later than the next business day after the bank institution confirms the transaction, issues to the client extracts from personal accounts in the established form and the necessary attachments to them with a mark of the Federal Treasury body on execution on each attached to the extract document.

Taking into account the above norms, the territorial bodies of the Federal Treasury, affixing the stamp of the Federal Treasury body on payment orders, are authorized bodies to carry out these actions, while they do not have the opportunity to affix the stamp and signature of the bank’s executive officer on a payment order of a budgetary institution that is not the account owner , opened in a bank.

Based on the above, in order to prevent the spread of the practice of judicial authorities refusing to accept for consideration statements of claim, complaints against court decisions of budgetary institutions, we ask you to bring to the attention of the courts of general jurisdiction the relevant clarifications, namely, taking into account the specifics of servicing budgetary institutions in the Federal Treasury, the possibility of considering the submitted in within the framework of N 142n by the Federal Treasury authorities, payment orders as an appropriate document confirming the fact of payment of the state duty.”

On the issue of the customer’s acceptance of payment orders printed using the “Client-Bank” system

On April 1, 2015, the legal reference system “Consultant+” disseminated information by e-mail that customers are required to accept payment orders printed from the “Bank-Client” system, submitted by participants as part of applications for participation in the competition. This conclusion was drawn from the text of the Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region dated March 17, 2015 in case No. A41-80373/14, which was upheld by the Resolution of the Tenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated June 25, 2015. This solution is not the only one. Thus, the court in the Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Chelyabinsk Region in case A76-8244/2013 dated September 19, 2013 came to similar conclusions (Resolution of the Eighteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated December 3, 2013 No. 18AP-11777/2013 in case No. A76-8244/2013 given the decision is upheld). Next, let us turn to the arguments given in these judicial acts.

In both cases, the courts in the reasoning part of the decisions refer to the Regulations on the rules for the transfer of funds, approved by the Bank of Russia on June 19, 2012 No. 383-P (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which establishes the rules for the activities of banks in making non-cash payments, including in the form settlements by payment orders. The said Regulations provide for banks to carry out such transfers on the orders of clients both on paper and in electronic form, including using electronic means of payment (clause 1.9.). According to clause 1.24 of the Regulations, the payer’s order in electronic form, the register (if any) is signed with an electronic signature (electronic signatures), an analogue of a handwritten signature (analogues of handwritten signatures) and (or) certified by codes, passwords and other means to confirm that the order ( register) compiled (compiled) by the payer or an authorized person (persons).

According to clause 4.6. Provisions execution of an order in electronic form for the purpose of transferring funds to a bank account is confirmed by the payer’s bank also by sending the executed order to the payer in electronic form indicating the execution date. Placing a stamp of the payer's bank and the signature of an authorized person of the payer's bank, a stamp of the recipient's bank and a signature of an authorized person of the recipient's bank is provided only for a payment order on paper, while in a payment order in electronic form the recipient's bank indicates only the date of execution in the order , set for the “Date” attribute.

Thus, in a payment order issued electronically, the date of its execution must be indicated in the “bank marks” section, and no special requirements for the bank stamp or signature of a bank employee for electronic payment orders have been established.

As the courts note, the Law on the Contract System does not prohibit tender participants from paying for the security of an application for participation in an open tender using electronic means of payment and submitting a payment order, executed electronically and reproduced on paper, as a document confirming the transfer of funds to securing such an application.

Judicial acts also contain an indication that the legislation on the contract system does not contain an imperative requirement for the need for additional certification of electronic payment documents reproduced on paper.

Thus, in accordance with the above judicial acts, the payment order printed using the “Client-Bank” system has the appropriate mark of the bank and complies with the requirements of the Regulations, as well as the provisions of paragraph 5 of part 2 of Art. 51 of the Law on the Contract System, and confirms the fact that the Applicant has transferred funds as security for an application for participation in an open competition.

A similar point of view is contained in some decisions of the territorial bodies of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia (see, for example, the Decision of the OFAS Commission for the Chuvash Republic - Chuvashia dated April 23, 2014 in case No. 79-K-2014, the decision of the OFAS Commission for Moscow dated 07/16/2014 in case No. 2-57-4895/77-14, etc.).

However, there is another point of view regarding the issue under consideration. Thus, from the contents of Appendix No. 2 to the Letter of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia dated January 23, 2014 N IA/2111/14
“On the issue of applying the norms of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses when bringing persons to administrative responsibility for violations committed when placing orders,” we can conclude that the payment order generated by the Bank-Client system to transfer the appropriate amount of funds to the account the customer is not a document that has a bank’s mark on the transfer of the appropriate amount of funds (a similar point of view is contained in the decisions of some territorial bodies of the FAS Russia, see, for example, the Decision of the Omsk OFAS dated June 18, 2014 in case No. 03-10.1/291- 2014).

As for judicial practice, in the Resolution of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal No. 09AP-37985/2014 in case No. A40-78845/14, Resolution of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal No. 09AP-12685/2015 dated May 7, 2015 in case No. A40-174745/ 14, Resolution of the Arbitration Court of the Far Eastern District N F03-1088/2015 dated May 7, 2015, the courts also proceed from the fact that the payment order generated by the Bank-Client system does not meet the requirements imposed by the provisions of the legislation on the contract system for a document confirming transfer of funds as security for an application for participation in the competition. In particular, in the Resolution of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal No. 09AP-37985/2014 in case No. A40-78845/14 it is noted: “From the content of clause 5, part 2, article 51 of the Law on the Contract System, it follows that the original payment order must be submitted , confirming the transfer of funds as security for an application for participation in an open tender with a bank mark, or a copy of this payment order certified by the bank.

Issue a payment order with a bank mark - how to revoke a payment order from the bank?

The existence of a payment order generated by the bank-client electronic system does not exempt the company from submitting the original payment order or a copy of this payment order certified by the bank, as provided for in the information card and the Contract System Law. The company has not provided such documents to the enterprise. Consequently, the enterprise rightfully rejected the company’s application to participate in an open competition.”

The second point of view is also supported by the fact that during the period of validity of the legislation on the placement of orders, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court No. 16083/11 dated May 22, 2012 and the Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated February 16, 2011 No. VAS-425/11 about refusal to transfer case No. A59-114/2010 proceeded from the fact that the payment order, which does not have a bank stamp and the signature of the responsible executor, is not an appropriate document confirming the transfer of funds as security for the application.

The author of this article believes that the electronic document formally generated by the “Client-Bank” system is an appropriate document confirming the transfer of funds for participation in the competition, however, participants as part of the applications do not provide electronic documents, but their copies, and therefore the provided copy of the payment the instructions do not satisfy the requirements of the legislation on the contract system.

So, in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 51 of the Federal Law of 04/05/2013 N 44-FZ “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs” (hereinafter also referred to as Law N 44-FZ), applications for participation in an open competition are submitted according to form and in the manner specified in the competition documentation. In accordance with clause 5, part 2, art. 51 of Law N 44-FZ, an application for participation in an open tender must contain a payment order confirming the transfer of funds as security for an application for participation in an open tender with a bank mark or a copy of this payment order certified by the bank. Failure to comply with the documentation requirements of an application for participation in the competition is grounds for rejection of such an application by the competition commission on the basis of Part 3 of Art. 53 Law No. 44-FZ).

As correctly noted in the article posted on the Internet at http://www.garant.ru/consult/gpurchase/605411/, in accordance with clause 3.1 of the National Standard of the Russian Federation GOST R 7.0.8-2013 “System of Standards in information, library and publishing. Record keeping and archiving. Terms and definitions" (approved by order of the Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology dated October 17, 2013 N 1185-st), the original payment order is a document produced in a single form, either in the form of an electronic document or in the form of a paper document. Thus, the participant, attaching a document printed from the “Bank-Client” system as part of the application, forms, in fact, an application that contains not the original electronic document, but its printed copy.

At the same time, such an option is excluded by the requirements of clause 5, part 2, art. 51 of Law N 44-FZ, according to which a copy of the payment order must be certified by the bank.

In conclusion, we note that the widespread use of the Bank-Client system in the business environment, as well as the customer’s ability to determine the fact of transfer of funds as security for an application, create the prerequisites for the legislator to consider the possibility of introducing changes to the current legislation on the contract system that would allow providing as part of applications for participation in the competition, copies of payment orders certified not by the bank, but by the participant in the competition.

When filing a statement of claim or complaint in court, you must provide proof of payment of the state fee. For an organization, this is usually a payment order with a bank mark. Payments are mainly made electronically. However, is it enough to attach a printout of an electronic payment document to confirm that the state duty has been paid? As practice shows, a court of general jurisdiction and an arbitration court have different approaches.

Electronic payments

In accordance with the requirements of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, a document confirming payment of the state duty is attached to the statement of claim, appeal and cassation complaint. If the specified document is missing, the statement of claim or complaint may be returned to the applicant.
Payment of the state duty can be made by transferring funds by bank.

For a legal entity this is the most convenient option. Transfers of funds by banks are carried out by order of the client electronically or on paper.
According to Art. 333.18 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the fact of payment of the state duty by the payer in non-cash form is confirmed by a payment order with a note from the bank or the relevant territorial body of the Federal Treasury (another body that opens and maintains accounts), including one that makes payments in electronic form, about its execution.
The rules for transferring funds are regulated by Bank of Russia Regulation No. 383-P dated June 19, 2012. In accordance with clause 4.6 of Regulation N 383-P, the execution of an order in electronic form for the purpose of transferring funds to a bank account is confirmed by the payer’s bank by sending the payer a notice in electronic form about the debiting of funds from the payer’s bank account indicating the details of the executed order or by sending the executed order in electronic form indicating the execution date. In this case, the specified notice from the payer’s bank can simultaneously confirm the acceptance of the order for execution in electronic form and its execution.

Arbitration court

Based on these rules of law, arbitration courts accept statements of claim and complaints if the fact of payment of the state duty is confirmed by printing an electronic payment document containing all the details (the date of debiting the funds, the type of payment - “electronic”, a note about the payment).
For example, in the Resolutions of the FAS SZO dated 02.13.2014 in case No. A26-5598/2013, FAS VSO dated 08.20.2012 in case No. A19-9761/2012, judicial acts on the return of statements of claim were canceled, since they were based on the explanations of the information letter Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated May 25, 2005 N 91 (currently inactive), according to which, in confirmation of payment of the state duty, a payment order must be submitted with a bank stamp and with the signature of the responsible executor.
The cassation court explained that such requirements apply to the execution of a payment order on paper. When transferring funds electronically, the payment order must indicate: type of payment - “electronic”, date of debiting the funds, bank mark confirming the payment. The electronic version of the payment order executed in this way was recognized by the court as complying with paragraph. 2 p. 3 art. 333.18 Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

Court of General Jurisdiction

A court of general jurisdiction, when resolving the issue of submitting a document confirming payment of the state duty, proceeds from the fact that the applicant must submit a duly certified payment order. In other words, a payment order with the bank’s blue seal, certified by a bank employee, is required.
For example, cassation rulings of the Moscow City Court dated 02.09.2015 N 4g/2-9494/15, dated 26.06.2015 N 4g/2-6865/15 returned cassation appeals. The court motivated the return by the fact that the attached printout of the payment order form from the electronic system is not properly executed and is not certified in the prescribed manner: it does not contain the signature of a bank employee on the bank’s mark on acceptance of the payment order, the bank’s seal and the mark on the transfer of state duty to the budget, duly certified.
Similar requirements for a payment order when transferring state fees electronically were presented, for example, in case No. 33-2119 (Appeal ruling of the Kirov Regional Court dated June 17, 2014).

At extra charge

As a rule, the bank issues a payment order with a blue seal for an additional fee.

Government procurement news

It is clear that this is regulated by an agreement between the bank and the client. However, if this service is paid, then you cannot argue with the bank, and you will have to pay for issuing a payment card certified by the bank.
In accordance with Art. 46 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, everyone is guaranteed judicial protection of their rights and freedoms.
In fact, having paid the state fee, but not being able to pay for the service for receiving a printout of the payment order with a blue seal from the bank, the legal entity will be deprived of the right to judicial protection. After all, a statement of claim or complaint will not be accepted for processing until a payment order with the bank’s blue seal is submitted.
Consequently, the requirement to submit a payment order with a bank stamp indicating payment of state duty with a blue seal may create an obstacle to judicial protection and increase legal costs. Especially for an organization that, due to the nature of its activities, is often forced to go to court to collect any periodic payments (for example, utility bills from the population).
It seems logical to be able to accept procedural documents when submitting a printout of an electronic payment order for payment of state duty. And only if there are doubts about their authenticity, require additional evidence.

If you do not find the information you need on this page, try using the site search:

Genuine payment document

Question:

The person made the payment of the state duty through the online banking system through a personal account on the Internet. Legal actions regarding this payment were not completed and the payer wrote an application for a refund.

In accordance with clause 3 of Article 333_40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, part 2, the application for the return of an overpaid (collected) amount of state duty must be accompanied by original payment documents if the state duty is subject to refund in full.

Is a printed payment document through the online banking system a genuine payment document, or is the payer obliged to contact the bank and certify this payment document with the seal and signature of a bank employee?

Answer:

A payment document printed through the online banking system (Internet banking, client bank) is a copy of the original (original) payment document generated electronically.

Sample payment order at VTB Bank

Without appropriate certification by the bank, it cannot be recognized as a genuine payment document.

Rationale:

In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 333_40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, an application for the return of an overpaid (collected) amount of state duty is submitted by the payer of the state duty to the body (official) authorized to perform legally significant actions for which the state duty was paid (collected).

The application for the return of an overpaid (collected) amount of state duty shall be accompanied by original payment documents if the state duty is subject to full refund, and if it is subject to partial refund, copies of the specified payment documents.

A payment order is a settlement (payment) document containing an order from the account owner (payer) to the bank servicing him to transfer a certain amount of money to the recipient's account opened in this or another bank (clause 1 of Article 863 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, clauses 1.12, 5.1 of the Regulations on the Rules transfer of funds, approved by the Bank of Russia on June 19, 2012 N 383-P). Such a document can be drawn up, accepted for execution and executed both on paper and in electronic form (clause 5.4 of Regulations N 383-P).

In accordance with Appendix 1 to Regulation N 383-P, in field 45 of the payment order “Bank Marks” on paper, the stamp of the payer’s bank and the signature of an authorized person of the payer’s bank, the stamp of the recipient’s bank and the signature of an authorized person of the recipient’s bank are affixed. In the payment order in electronic form and on paper, the recipient’s bank indicates the execution date in the manner established for the “Date” requisite, that is, in numbers in the format established by the bank.

According to Part 5 of Article 9 of the Federal Law of December 6, 2011 N 402-FZ “On Accounting,” the primary accounting document is drawn up on paper and (or) in the form of an electronic document signed with an electronic signature.

At the same time, on the basis of paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the Federal Law of April 6, 2011 N 63-FZ “On Electronic Signatures,” information in electronic form signed with a qualified electronic signature is recognized as an electronic document equivalent to a paper document signed with a handwritten signature.

Thus, only an electronic document signed with a qualified electronic signature is recognized as equivalent to a paper document signed with a handwritten signature.

According to paragraph 3.1 of the National Standard of the Russian Federation GOST R 7.0.8-2013 “System of standards for information, library and publishing. Record keeping and archiving. Terms and definitions" (approved by order of Rosstandart dated October 17, 2013 N 1185-st) the original document is the first or only copy of the document (subclause 21). A copy of a document is a copy of a document that completely reproduces the information of the original document (subclause 23).

Electronic copy of a document - a copy of a document created in electronic form (subclause 24). A certified copy of a document is a copy of a document on which, in accordance with the established procedure, details are affixed that ensure its legal significance (subclause 25).

Thus, the original document (including a payment order) must be generated in a single copy either on paper or in electronic form. Therefore, the original of a payment order generated electronically in the online banking system is a payment order generated electronically, signed with a qualified electronic signature of authorized officials.

A printed copy of such a document on paper is a copy of the original payment document in electronic form. A printed copy of the payment document for the purpose of refunding the state duty must be certified by the bank.

Lisitskaya O.S.,

expert in civil, corporate and labor law

Payment order(payment) – payment document. The account owner (payer), through a payment order, instructs his bank to transfer certain funds to the recipient's account opened with this or another credit institution.

Payment orders can be made:

Payments for goods supplied, work performed, services rendered;

Transfers of funds to budgets of all levels and to extra-budgetary funds;

Transfers of funds for the purpose of returning or placing credits (loans) or deposits and paying interest on them;

Transfers of funds for other purposes provided for by law or agreement;

Advance payment for goods, works, services;

Making periodic payments.

The payment order is drawn up by the client on a standard form of form 0401060. The standards of the payment order, as well as other payment documents, are prescribed in the “Regulations on non-cash payments in the Russian Federation” of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation No. 2-P dated October 3, 2002, and from July 9, 2012 - in “Regulations on the rules for transferring funds”; No. 383-P dated June 19, 2012.

The payment order must contain the following details:

Name and number of the payment order, day, month and year of its issue;

Form code according to OKUD OK 011-93;

Name of the payer and recipient of funds and their account numbers;

TIN of the payer and recipient;

Name and location of the payer and recipient's bank, their bank identification codes (BIC), numbers of correspondent accounts or subaccounts;

Purpose, amount and order of payment;

Type of operation;

Signatures of authorized persons and seal impression (in certain cases).

The Bank does not accept for execution payment orders that do not meet the requirements stipulated by law (Article 864 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). When issuing a payment order, corrections and errors must not be made when filling out the details.

The number of payment order copies drawn up and submitted to the bank is determined by the number of settlement participants. On the first copy, which remains in the bank, the signature and seal (if any) of the payer are required. The bank makes a note about execution on one of the copies of the payment order and returns it to the account owner. Payment orders are accepted by the bank regardless of the availability of funds in the payer's account. The bank fully executes the order if there are sufficient funds in the client’s account to make the payment. If there are insufficient funds in the account, they are written off in compliance with the provisions specified in Art. 855 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of priority. The bank places such payment documents in a special file cabinet under off-balance sheet account No. 90902 “Settlement documents not paid on time.”

The payment order is valid for presentation to the bank within 10 days. The bank is obliged to inform the payer about the execution of the order no later than the next business day after its submission to the bank, unless a different period is provided for in the bank account agreement.

The payment order can also be issued in electronic form through the Client-Bank system. For electronic payment orders transmitted via communication channels, each bank independently determines the procedure for execution, acceptance and protection.