Hai Ha Petro Chairman Tran Tuyet Mai was accused of directing false declarations, dishonest declarations, and not declaring and paying sales tax on 3.8 million liters of A95-III gasoline outside the accounting books.
Ms. Tran Tuyet Mai, Chairwoman of the Board of Directors of Hai Ha Waterway Transport Company Limited (Hai Ha Petro); Le Thi Hue, Executive Director and Chief Accountant of Hai Ha, have just been prosecuted by the Supreme People's Procuracy for the crime of Violating regulations on management and use of State assets causing loss and waste and Violating regulations on accounting causing serious consequences, on January 20.
Nguyen Thi Ngoc Anh, in charge of the General Department of Hai Ha Company, was prosecuted for violating accounting regulations causing serious consequences..
The three defendants were prosecuted by the Supreme People's Procuracy and brought before the Thai Binh Provincial People's Court for trial. The Thai Binh Provincial People's Procuracy was assigned to exercise the right to prosecute and supervise the first-instance trial.
According to the indictment, Hai Ha Waterway Transport Company Limited was first granted a business registration certificate in 2003. By June 2023, the company had undergone 24 changes in business registration, had a charter capital of VND 454 billion, and had 8 branches in localities.
Hai Ha Petro was granted a license to import and export petroleum by the Ministry of Industry and Trade and 5 years later was certified as a qualified petroleum trader since 2017.
As a trader, Hai Ha Company is obliged to set aside a petroleum price stabilization fund (BOG) to participate in stabilizing gasoline prices according to regulations. To set aside, the enterprise needs to open a BOG fund account at a commercial bank, and deduct money based on the amount of sales revenue to deposit into the BOG account periodically.
From 2017 to January 12, 2024, the company had to set aside more than VND612 billion for the BOG fund. Authorities accused Ms. Mai of taking advantage of being assigned by the State to manage this fund to directly direct her subordinates to pay VND295 billion to set aside the BOG fund, still owing VND317 billion.
Ms. Mai did not pay 50 billion VND on time because she needed the money for business activities. Ms. Mai and Hue also withdrew 266.3 billion VND from this bank and transferred it to other bank accounts of Hai Ha to pay for petroleum import contracts.
Due to violations of regulations on management and use of BOG fund, Hai Ha has been administratively sanctioned 4 times. The Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Ministry of Finance have also reminded the company many times but the company has not remedied the consequences. The company's operations were then seriously affected, with negative equity, business losses, bank debts, and tax debts, making it unable to return VND317 billion of BOG fund to the budget.
Related to the act of forgery and falsification of accounting documents, The prosecutor determined that Ms. Mai had assigned the defendants Anh and Hue to use two accounting software to monitor business activities. In which, the FAST software serves to compile data, financial reports, taxes, and tax declarations. The VISOFT software is to monitor the actual business activities of the company and ecosystems, in order to keep a part of the actual revenue from selling gasoline off the books.
Based on the purchase and sale list, the investigation agency determined that the amount of A95-III gasoline sold and declared for tax by Hai Ha was 150.5 million liters. The data in VISOFT software showed that 154.3 million liters were sold.
The authorities therefore accused Hai Ha Petro of making false declarations, making dishonest declarations, and not declaring and paying sales tax on 3.8 million liters of A95-III gasoline outside the accounting books. This led to the company not paying environmental protection tax of 15.3 billion, causing losses to the State.
Ms. Mai was accused of being the mastermind and decision maker, causing the state to lose 317 billion VND in BOG funds and 15.3 billion VND in taxes. The defendant voluntarily paid 930 million VND and 1.8 million USD to remedy the consequences. Defendant Anh paid 1.7 billion VND to remedy the consequences.
Regarding aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the People's Procuracy said that during the investigation and prosecution, the defendants Mai and Anh proactively overcame the consequences, proactively let their families pay money to remedy the consequences, and honestly confessed.
In addition, the People's Procuracy recommended that the Thai Binh Provincial Tax Department apply measures to recover more than VND 1,611 billion in environmental protection tax and late payment fees from Hai Ha Petro.
Regarding Hai Ha's outstanding debts at 5 banks, namely BIDV, SHB, Vietinbank, and Baoviet Bank, the investigation agency recommends that the debt and collateral assets of Hai Ha Company and related individuals be recovered. If the amount of money exceeding Hai Ha's outstanding debts is recovered, the investigation agency should contact and coordinate with the investigation agency to recover, pay to the State budget, and remedy the consequences of the case.
University (according to VnExpress)