Fabrication of false debts to Apolozan's detriment
Apolozan case · ERDF fraud (Bilbao / Alicante / EU)
This annex documents two facts about the same debt: how it was calculated and how it was notified. The second refutes a central piece of the later files.
The debt and its calculation
- Amount: 149,040 euros, the result of inspection actions by the Bilbao Provincial Tax Authority on Apolozan's economic results.
- The case documentation attributes that figure to economic results that do not correspond to the real activity of the period — the declared and invoiced activity is recorded in A.65 and A.66, and the building-works expert report in A.49.
- The debt is claimed in parallel with the construction of the Bilbao criminal file (A.8, A.11), and the complainants invoke it in seeking seizures in 2014 (A.40).
The fact of the notifications
This annex's documentation records that the notifications of this debt were delivered to the Bilbao address ("delivered at…", recorded in the acknowledgements). That fact takes on contrast value against the files that, for the same period, processed actions by public-notice notification alleging the taxpayer's non-location between 2010 and 2014 (A.40, A.41): the same tax system was delivering a debt by hand and declaring the recipient untraceable for others.
The chain, in dates
→ 6-12-2013 — inspections sought by the complainants before the Provincial Tax Authority → (2013-2014) — assessment of the debt: €149,040 — notified with delivery to the Bilbao address → 6-6-2014 — the complainants invoke it in seeking seizures before the AEAT (A.40)
Its function in the whole
A claimed and notified provincial debt gives the appearance of insolvency and an irregular tax history. The later files use it as a precedent: it appears in the seizure application of June 2014 (A.40) and in the picture the Alicante AEAT handled to activate the 2009 personal income tax file (A.41, A.50).
How to verify it
Compare the notification acknowledgements of this annex with the "non-location" steps of the AEAT files (A.41). The dates overlap; the criteria do not.
Documentary evidence · A.7 · 10 October 2014 · Main documentary reconstruction
EuroFraud case file · every statement links to its document (A.X / DOC-XXXX). Evidentiary material; every person named is presumed innocent.