The prosecution claims that the account of sale is false, and that the registration made according to it is also false. The goods that are the subject of the listing were not purchased from Contel Investments Limited , but from Rasco of Hong Kong, for $43,380. This sum was paid by means of a letter of credit opened by Bank Leumi Le-Israel, at the request of defendant 1 through Lantex Trade (1992) Ltd.
The prosecution further claims that on various dates thereafter, defendant 1 submitted to the Customs Authority six additional false receipts, for the purpose of releasing the aforementioned goods, to which the false sales account was attached. In these acts, defendant 1 falsely declared that the value of goods was lower than the real value, and as a result he reduced the amount of import taxes to which he was liable. He used a forged document, misled customs officials, defrauded the State Treasury, and evaded the payment of import taxes in the total amount of NIS 49,675.
Charge No. 10
- On July 5, 1999, defendant 1 submitted to the Customs Authority, on behalf of Schloss and through the customs broker Continental Ltd., a license for the import of goods into Israel of the type of DVD players, according to which the value of the goods was $64,100. Attached to this register was a document pretending to be a sales account by Saturella Commercial Inc. of London, which pretended to be the supplier of the goods.
The prosecution claims that this is a false sales account, and that the registration according to which it was drawn up is also false. The goods were purchased not from Saturella Commercial Inc., but from Rasco International Ltd . of Hong Kong, for $84,750. This sum was paid by means of a letter of credit opened by the First International Bank of Israel at the request of the Lancets Company, for Defendant 1.
The prosecution further claims that on various dates thereafter, defendant 1 submitted to the Customs Authority five additional false records for the purpose of releasing the aforementioned goods, to which a copy of the false sales account was attached. The sales account was forged by defendant 1 with the aim of using it for the purpose of defrauding the customs and VAT authorities. In these acts, defendant 1 falsely declared that the value of goods was lower than the real value, and as a result, he reduced the amount of import taxes that he would have been charged had it not been for the fraud. In doing so, defendant 1 made use of a forged document, misled the customs officials, defrauded the State Treasury and evaded the payment of import taxes in the total amount of NIS 99,496.