For 2016 - the total omission of income from the motel in the sum of the cash deposit is NIS 214,600 minus NIS 5,000 that was paid as bribes by a cut. A total of NIS 209,600 plus NIS 30,000 from the rent in Pardes Hanna, and NIS 239,600 in 2016.
For 2017 - the total omission of income from the motel in the sum of the cash deposit of NIS 396,820 minus the bribe received in cash from Eric Shaked, the checks deducted at the "HaShalom" exchange in 2017 in a total sum after deducting a commission of NIS 120,392 plus NIS 15,000 in cash in the third charge (Reuven Gonen). A total amount of NIS 205,392, so that the amount of income from the motel was NIS 191,428 plus NIS 30,000 from the rent in Pardes Hanna, so that in business restrictions NIS 221,428 in 2017.
for 2018 - since the bank's data were incomplete, the accuser relies on the diary data alongside the income from the long-term rental of the unit. 19,845 USD * 3.5 = 69,457 NIS, in addition to the sum of 54,000 NIS of long-term rental of the unit - 123,457 NIS. In addition, the rental of the apartment in Pardes Hanna until May 2018 (10,000 NIS), and in the antitrust business 133,457 NIS in 2018.
Total income from the omitted motel (years 2015-2018) - at least NIS 669,605.
The defendant's total income from renting the apartment in Pardes Hanna that was not reported (years 2013-2018) - NIS 160,000.
The defendant's total income from bribery and theft by a public servant: NIS 417,538
Charge 15 - The Defense's Summaries
- The defense denied everything attributed to the defendants. It was noted that the defendants repeat what was stated in the affidavit of the main witness in the civil proceeding that was filed in this proceeding (P/6). The defendants proved through witnesses and affidavits that the accuser's claims were not true, and they repeat what was stated in the opinion of CPA Damati, which was submitted on their behalf.
- As for the motel (referred to in the defense summaries as "the house" and "the apartment"), it was claimed that it was purchased on June 1, 2014 (and not as stated by the accuser) and until December 2014, inclusively, it underwent a thorough renovation in which it was divided into five units. Therefore, it was argued that the accuser's claim that the motel was rented as early as July 2014 should be rejected. In accordance with the accountant's instructions, the motel was registered as a business, in the name of N.K. Building, and as of December 2014, the motel was declared a business. The motel was registered in the name of this company until 2016, during which time the house was managed vis-à-vis the tenants and through tax invoices. In 2016 until 2018, three housing units were transferred for the use of the association, for the benefit of children coming from abroad for the purpose of receiving chemotherapy treatments in Israel. During this period as well, the defendants continued to report to the tax authorities through an accountant, and the defendants transferred all income and expenses to him. The books of accounts were managed and reported by an accountant.
- The defendant's daughter lived in the motel's basement unit during 2017, after the end of the lease period of the tenant Lior Benin, who lived in this unit from February 20, 2015 to February 20, 2016.
- As for the apartment in Pardes Hanna, it was transferred to the defendant's ownership on August 3, 2017, and not in 2013 as alleged in the indictment. When he owned the apartment, the monthly rent was NIS 2,500. The payment was transferred to his account and the defendant transferred the rent money to his daughter. This income was not reported because it is not the amount of rent required to be reported by law.
- To the accuser's claim regarding the failure to bring witnesses, the defense replied that witnesses testified on its behalf and that the affidavits of tenants who lived in the house were submitted free of charge through the association.
- In the case of the defendant, in accordance with the testimony and testimonies of CPA Dotan and the defendant, the person who handled "the whole matter" and was supposed to convey the information about the income was the defendant, as he did. If this or that matter fell between the cracks, it has nothing to do with the defendant, who did not have the necessary awareness and relied on the defendant's reports.
- The defense claimed that the income from the motel and the apartment in Pardes Hanna from 2014 to 2017 amounted to NIS 222,659. It was argued that the total unreported income that appears in the accuser's summaries is hundreds of thousands of shekels higher than the settlement in the civil proceeding.
- The defense also argued that without a suitable economic expert, it is not possible to carry out a cash advance for the purpose of assessing the amount of income. As stated above, the accuser updated her summaries that she wishes to estimate the defendants' income from the motel according to the cash deposits and not through the cash deposits.
Charge 15 - Hearing
- The defendants were charged with the offense of omitting income from a report under section 220(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance and of multiple offenses of fraud, cunning or subterfuge under section 220(5) of the Ordinance.
This is the wording of section 220 of the Income Tax Ordinance: