Called to Give a Statement in a Turkish Fake Invoice Investigation 2026: Suspect or Witness, the Tax Crime Report and Opinion (TPL Art. 367), Counsel’s Access to the File (CCP Art. 153), Rights During Questioning (CCP Arts. 147–150), Interpreters for Foreign Managers, Detention, Effective Repentance and a Non-Prosecution Decision

In a Turkish fake invoice case, the criminal investigation becomes visible when a director, partner, employee or accountant of a company receives a summons from the public prosecutor’s office or the police. The first statement can affect the whole course of a charge under Tax Procedure Law (TPL) Art. 359, which carries imprisonment of three to eight years for issuing or using fake documents. Criminal penalties cannot be imposed on companies (Criminal Code Art. 20(2)), so the prosecutor summons the individuals who acted for the company. The prosecutor may take statements before the tax administration’s report arrives, but a criminal case cannot be filed until the result of a tax examination has been notified with the opinion of the report evaluation commission (TPL Art. 367). Defence counsel may review the investigation file and take copies, and in an investigation limited to TPL offences that right cannot be restricted (Code of Criminal Procedure, CCP, Art. 153). A suspect may remain silent on everything except identity, may ask for evidence in his or her favour to be collected and may have counsel present (CCP Arts. 147 and 149). A person who does not speak Turkish well enough to explain himself or herself is heard through an interpreter appointed by the prosecutor or the judge (CCP Art. 202). This guide covers each step, from reading the summons to asking for a decision not to prosecute (CCP Art. 172), and includes two model petitions. It reflects the law in force on 27 October 2026.

Short answer: what to do before the statement

The period between the summons and the statement is the time to understand the allegation and to prepare. The table sets out the steps and the rule behind each one.

Reading the summons: suspect or witness?

Under CCP Art. 145, a person whose statement is to be taken is called by a summons. The summons states the reason for the call clearly and warns that the person will be brought by force if he or she does not appear. A suspect who does not comply may be ordered to be brought by force, and so may a suspect for whom there are sufficient grounds for an arrest or detention warrant, even without a prior summons (CCP Art. 146(1)). A person brought by force is taken before the authority that called him or her immediately and within 24 hours at the latest (CCP Art. 146(4)). A witness who was duly summoned and does not appear without notifying an excuse is also brought by force, and the costs caused by the absence are charged to the witness (CCP Art. 44(1)). Ignoring a summons is therefore the worst possible start to a fake invoice file.

The first thing to check on the summons is the capacity in which you are called. A suspect is a person under suspicion of an offence and gives a defence in the investigation conducted about him or her. A witness describes what he or she knows about the acts of others and must tell the truth. In fake invoice files, some people from the same company may be called as suspects and others as witnesses, and a person’s capacity may change as the investigation develops. If the summons does not make the capacity clear, it should be clarified before the statement, either with the investigation bureau or through counsel.

The terms matter. Under CCP Art. 2(1)(g), “taking a statement” means the hearing of a suspect about the offence under investigation by the police or the public prosecutor. A hearing by a judge or court is an “interrogation” (CCP Art. 2(1)(h)). Explanations given to a tax inspector during a tax examination are not a statement in this sense. What is written in the inspection records does, however, reach the criminal file, as explained in the section on records signed during the tax examination.

Who is summoned, and in what capacity

Criminal sanctions cannot be imposed on legal entities (Criminal Code Art. 20(2)). Under TPL Art. 333(3), the penalties for the acts in Art. 359 are imposed on those who commit them. The prosecutor therefore calls the individuals who acted for the company, not the company itself. A person’s position in the company also shapes the questions he or she will be asked.

If an employee or accountant knowingly and willingly took part in the act, the rules on complicity apply. Under TPL Art. 360, the penalty of an accomplice who had no benefit from the offence is reduced by half. The defence of the company that issued the invoices is outside the scope of this page; this guide concentrates on the managers and employees of the buyer company that is alleged to have used them.

Holding the office of legal representative does not in itself create criminal liability. TPL Art. 333(3) attaches the penalty to the person who committed the act, and criminal liability is personal: no one is held responsible for another person’s act (Criminal Code Art. 20(1)). If the company can show who held purchasing authority, on whose approval the invoices were recorded and who made the payments, that evidence becomes central to the defence of a manager who did not take part. The interests of a manager and an employee are not always the same. If the employee says “I recorded it on instructions” and the manager says “I did not know”, it becomes difficult for one lawyer to defend both. Each person’s position should be assessed separately from the outset.

Where the investigation started: tax crime report and opinion (TPL Art. 367)

Under TPL Art. 367(1), tax inspectors who find during an examination that an offence in Art. 359 has been committed must report it to the public prosecutor’s office, with the opinion of the relevant report evaluation commission. A prosecutor who learns of such an offence in another way must immediately inform the relevant tax office and ask for an examination (Art. 367(2)). The filing of a criminal case is then suspended until the result of the examination is notified to the prosecutor’s office (Art. 367(3)).

For the statement stage, the consequence is this. The prosecutor may carry out investigative steps and take statements before the opinion arrives, but cannot file a criminal case until the result of the examination and the opinion have been notified. A provision added by Law No. 7394 in 2022 states that, in investigations or prosecutions already under way, no separate report and opinion are required for a person who turns out to have committed the act that is the subject of the opinion, alone or together with someone else (Art. 367(5)). That exception is tied to the act covered by the opinion. Issuing fake documents and using them are listed separately in TPL Art. 359(b). In our view, an opinion about the seller’s act of issuing invoices does not replace an opinion about the buyer’s act of using them. This point is contested, and the scope of the exception has to be argued on the facts of each file. Before the statement, counsel should establish which person, which period and which act the report and opinion in the file cover.

The tax and criminal tracks run in parallel. TPL Art. 367 also states that a conviction under Art. 359 does not prevent the separate application of tax loss or irregularity penalties. A provision that declared criminal judgments and tax penalty decisions independent of each other was annulled by the Constitutional Court (decision E.2019/4, K.2021/78 of 4 November 2021). Statements made on one track can be read on the other, so the explanations given to the tax inspector, the objections to the tax assessment and the statement to the prosecutor must be consistent.

Seeing the file first: counsel’s access (CCP Art. 153)

Procedural steps in the investigation are confidential, without prejudice to other statutory provisions and provided that the rights of the defence are not harmed (CCP Art. 157). That confidentiality protects the investigation from the public; it does not operate against the suspect’s defence. Under CCP Art. 153(1), defence counsel may review the contents of the file during the investigation and may take copies of any documents free of charge. That right may be restricted only by a judge’s decision, at the request of the prosecutor, where the review could endanger the purpose of the investigation. A restriction may be ordered only in investigations into the offences listed in CCP Art. 153(2).

The list in CCP Art. 153(2) does not include the offences in the Tax Procedure Law. It does include forming an organisation to commit offences (Criminal Code Art. 220) and the smuggling offences in Law No. 5607. Counsel’s right to review the file therefore cannot be restricted in an investigation conducted only on a TPL Art. 359 allegation. Where the file also contains an organisation allegation, a restriction may be ordered. Even then, records containing the statement of the arrested person or the suspect, expert reports and records of judicial acts at which those persons were entitled to be present are outside the restriction (CCP Art. 153(3)). Once the court accepts the indictment, counsel may review the whole file (CCP Art. 153(4)).

Counsel reviewing the file under Art. 153 does so as the suspect’s chosen defence counsel and will need to present a power of attorney. A suspect who is abroad can sign one before a Turkish consulate, or before a local notary with an apostille followed by a sworn Turkish translation. Turkey is a party to the 1961 Hague Apostille Convention. The documents to look for in the file are the tax examination report, the tax crime report, the report evaluation commission’s opinion and any records drawn up at the company’s premises.

The invoice-by-invoice document set

The defence against a fake invoice allegation has two axes: whether the transaction was real and whether there was intent. Under TPL Art. 3/B, the real nature of the taxable event and of the transactions relating to it is decisive in taxation and may be proved by any evidence other than an oath. Under Criminal Code Art. 21(1), an offence requires intent, and under Art. 30(1) a person who does not know the material elements of the legal definition of the offence at the time of the act does not act intentionally. Having documents that support both axes at hand during the statement allows each answer to be matched with a concrete record.

These documents have value because they were created at the time of the transaction. A delivery note or contract drawn up afterwards for a transaction that did not take place does not help the defence. On the contrary, issuing the original or copies of documents as fakes, in whole or in part, is itself an offence under TPL Art. 359(b). The relationship between the date of the findings about the seller and the dates of the company’s own transactions is also central to the question of intent. The criteria the tax administration uses to assess knowing use are discussed in our Turkish guide on knowing and unknowing use of fake documents (in Turkish).

Rights during the statement and prohibited methods (CCP Arts. 147–148)

CCP Art. 147(1) lists the rules that must be followed when a suspect’s statement is taken. Whether these rights were explained is written in the statement record; if they were not, the reason is also written there. Before the statement begins, the suspect and counsel should check that the rights have been read out and recorded.

A suspect’s statement must be based on free will. Physical or mental interventions that impair free will, such as ill-treatment, torture, administering drugs, exhaustion, deception, force, threats or the use of certain devices, are prohibited. No advantage contrary to law may be promised. A statement obtained by prohibited methods cannot be used as evidence even if the suspect consents (CCP Art. 148(1)–(3)). If a result with no basis in law is promised in exchange for a statement, that fact should be written into the record and counsel’s presence should be requested.

Under CCP Art. 148(4), a statement taken by the police without counsel present cannot be the basis of a judgment unless the suspect or accused confirms it before a judge or court. That rule concerns statements taken by the police; it does not cover a statement given before the public prosecutor. If a suspect who has been arrested needs to give a further statement about the same matter, that statement may be taken only by the public prosecutor (CCP Art. 148(5)).

Defence counsel and mandatory counsel (CCP Arts. 149–150)

A suspect may have the assistance of one or more defence counsel at every stage of the investigation and prosecution. During the investigation, no more than three lawyers may be present when a statement is taken (CCP Art. 149(1)–(2)). The lawyer’s right to meet the suspect, to be present while the statement is taken or during interrogation, and to give legal assistance cannot be prevented or restricted (CCP Art. 149(3)).

TPL offences have a particular feature regarding mandatory counsel. Under CCP Art. 150(3), counsel is appointed without a request only for offences whose minimum penalty is more than five years’ imprisonment. The minimum penalties of the offences in TPL Art. 359 are eighteen months, two years and three years. A suspect in a fake invoice file is therefore not given counsel automatically unless he or she asks. A suspect who states that he or she cannot choose counsel is assigned one by the bar on request (CCP Art. 150(1)). Counsel is assigned without a request for a suspect who is a child, or who is disabled to the extent of being unable to conduct his or her own defence, or who is deaf and mute (CCP Art. 150(2)). In a fake invoice file, the request for counsel should therefore be made clearly at the start of the statement.

Before 15 April 2022, the upper limits were three years for Art. 359(a) and five years for Art. 359(b) and (c). The amendment by Law No. 7394 raised them. Under the principle of the more favourable law (Criminal Code Art. 7(2)), acts committed before that date are assessed under the provision more favourable to the suspect.

Foreign managers: interpreters, Turkish records and suspects abroad

A foreign national who manages a Turkish company may be summoned in the same way as a Turkish director. The criminal procedure rules above apply equally, with some additional points.

Interpreter. Under CCP Art. 202(1), if the accused or the victim does not know Turkish well enough to explain himself or herself, the essential points of the claims and the defence are translated through an interpreter appointed by the court. CCP Art. 202(3) applies the same rule to suspects, victims and witnesses heard during the investigation, and the interpreter is appointed by the judge or the public prosecutor. Article 6(3)(e) of the European Convention on Human Rights grants everyone charged with a criminal offence the right to the free assistance of an interpreter if he or she cannot understand or speak the language used in court. A foreign manager who intends to give the statement through an interpreter should tell the prosecutor’s office before the date, so that one can be appointed in time.

Turkish record. The statement record is drawn up in Turkish. CCP Art. 147(1)(i) requires the record to be read and signed and to state any reason for refusing to sign. A foreign manager should ask the interpreter to translate the record back before signing it, and any answer that has been recorded wrongly should be corrected first.

Consular notification. Under Article 36 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to which Turkey is a party, a foreign national who is arrested or detained may ask that the consular post of his or her state be informed without delay, and must be told of this right without delay.

Suspects abroad. A director who lives abroad is still a suspect if the summons names him or her as one. When suspects or evidence are abroad, Turkish prosecutors work through Law No. 6706 on International Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters, which also allows assistance to be requested by video and audio link (Art. 9). This is explained in our guide on suspects, evidence and assets abroad under Law No. 6706. A director who is abroad and wishes to give a statement should decide, with counsel, whether to come to Turkey, and the travel ban risk discussed below should be assessed before any trip.

Silence or explanation?

No one may be compelled to make a statement, or to produce evidence, that would incriminate himself or herself or the close relatives specified by law (Constitution Art. 38(5)). Silence is a statutory right for every question other than identity (CCP Art. 147(1)(e)). The nature of a fake invoice allegation makes the choice a specific one. The allegation assumes that the buyer did not carry out a real transaction and knew that the invoice was fake. If the transaction was real and documents show it, putting those documents forward in the statement and asking for them to be collected brings favourable facts into the file (CCP Art. 147(1)(f)).

Which approach fits cannot be decided before the file has been reviewed. Explanations that rest on guesses, or that documents cannot support, may later have to be withdrawn or changed, and a changed account weakens the defence.

Questions to expect

The questions follow the elements of the allegation. In an allegation of using fake documents, the prosecutor is looking for two things: that no real delivery or service stood behind the invoice, and that the buyer knew it. The topics below and the preparation for each follow from that.

The prison term is imposed on the individual who committed the act (TPL Art. 333(3)), and criminal liability is personal (Criminal Code Art. 20(1)). Whether a manager actually took part in the purchasing process is therefore one of the most important topics in the statement. Under TPL Art. 3/B, a party who alleges a situation that does not fit economic, commercial or technical requirements, or that is not normal and usual for the nature of the event, bears the burden of proving it. That rule belongs to the tax side, but the same facts are discussed in both files.

Records signed during the tax examination

Where a criminal investigation starts from a tax crime report, a tax examination has come first, and the records drawn up during it form the basis of that report. Under TPL Art. 141, events and account positions relating to taxation may be established in records during the examination where necessary. Any objections and observations of the persons concerned are written into the record, and a copy must be left with the taxpayer. If the persons concerned refuse to sign, the books or documents containing the events and account positions referred to in the record may be taken without their consent.

Preparing for the statement therefore starts with reading those records. If a record contains a sentence such as “the seller was never met in person” or “the place of delivery is unknown”, that point needs to be clarified in the criminal statement. At the start of an examination, the person examined must be told in writing what the examination concerns and that it has begun (TPL Art. 140(1)); that letter shows which periods and which taxes are covered. Where there are signs of tax evasion, a search within a tax examination may be carried out only by order of a criminal judge of peace (TPL Art. 142).

Detention in an operation, arrest and travel bans

An investigation into a network issuing fake documents may begin with simultaneous detentions instead of summonses. Under CCP Art. 91(1), detention may not exceed 24 hours from the moment of apprehension, excluding the time needed to bring the person to the nearest judge or court. For collective offences, meaning offences committed by three or more persons whether or not they acted in concert (CCP Art. 2(1)(k)), the public prosecutor may order in writing that the detention period be extended by one day at a time, for up to three days, because of difficulty in collecting evidence or the large number of suspects (CCP Art. 91(3)). The detained person, counsel, legal representative, spouse, or a blood relative of the first or second degree may apply to the criminal judge of peace against the apprehension, the detention or the extension order. The judge examines the application on the file and decides it within 24 hours (CCP Art. 91(5)).

Arrest pending trial requires concrete evidence of strong suspicion together with a ground for arrest, and the measure must be proportionate to the importance of the matter and to the expected penalty or security measure (CCP Art. 100(1)). One ground is strong suspicion, arising from the suspect’s conduct, that he or she will destroy, conceal or alter evidence, or try to put pressure on witnesses, victims or others (CCP Art. 100(2)(b)). The catalogue of offences for which a ground for arrest may be presumed does not include the offences in the Tax Procedure Law (CCP Art. 100(3)). In a fake invoice allegation, a concrete ground for arrest must therefore be shown.

Instead of arrest, a judge may place a suspect under judicial control, and one of the available measures is a ban on leaving the country (CCP Art. 109(3)(a)). During the investigation, judicial control is ordered by the criminal judge of peace at the prosecutor’s request (CCP Art. 110(1)). For a foreign manager who lives abroad or travels for the group, this measure can weigh heavily. The duration of travel bans, how to have them lifted, and the separate rules for bans linked to tax debts are discussed in our guide on travel bans in Turkish fake invoice investigations.

Wider operations involving seizure of company accounts or documents, or an organisation allegation, are discussed in our Turkish guides on searches and seizures in fake invoice files (in Turkish) and organised tax evasion examinations (in Turkish).

After the statement: the timing of payment

The statement is given during the investigation stage, and the effective repentance reduction depends on the stage at which payment is made. The date of the statement is therefore also the moment to consider whether to pay. Under TPL Art. 359, if the tax assessed because of the acts in that article, the whole of the late payment interest and surcharge, half of the penalties imposed and the related surcharge are paid during the investigation stage, the prison term is reduced by half. If they are paid during the prosecution stage before judgment, it is reduced by one third.

Payment is not a defence. It is a decision about the eventual penalty, and it can be made without accepting the allegation while the defence that the transactions were real continues. How the amount is calculated and how the reduction affects the prison term are covered in our guide on effective repentance in Turkish fake invoice cases.

Supplementary statement, evidence and a non-prosecution decision

The public prosecutor must collect evidence both for and against the suspect so that the material truth can be established and a fair trial can take place (CCP Art. 160(2)). A written supplementary statement after the statement, submitting documents and asking for records not in the file to be collected, rests on that duty. If the evidence collected at the end of the investigation creates sufficient suspicion that the offence was committed, an indictment is prepared (CCP Art. 170(2)). If no evidence creating sufficient suspicion to file a public case is obtained, or prosecution is not possible, a decision of non-prosecution is issued (CCP Art. 172(1)).

For acts under Art. 359(a) committed before 15 April 2022, the upper limit before the amendment was three years. Under the principle of the more favourable law (Criminal Code Art. 7(2)), whether the conditions for deferring the public case are met for those acts, including the condition of compensating the loss (CCP Art. 171(3)), needs separate assessment.

Model petitions

The two models below are English working drafts for group review. Petitions filed with a Turkish prosecutor’s office must be in Turkish and completed with the facts of the file. The first is filed by defence counsel after the summons and before the statement. The second is filed after the statement, for a manager of a buyer company where the investigation rests on a report and opinion about the seller only.

Model 1: request to review the file, obtain copies and set the date of the statement

Model 2: supplementary statement, request to collect evidence and request for a decision of non-prosecution

The main request in the second petition is the decision of non-prosecution. The fourth request is made only for the case that the opposite view is taken and does not accept the act. Whether a report and opinion about the seller cover the buyer’s use is contested, so the first heading should be argued together with the defences on the merits, not instead of them. If an effective repentance payment is under consideration, that decision should be taken together with the overall defence strategy and before the indictment is accepted.

How Hukukçular Evi can help

At the statement stage of a fake invoice investigation, the records created during the tax examination and the rules of criminal procedure have to be read together. Hukukçular Evi Ankara clarifies the capacity in which a person has been summoned, reviews the investigation file and the scope of the tax crime report and opinion, goes through the examination records, prepares the invoice-by-invoice document set, attends the statement, and files supplementary statements and requests for evidence. We also advise on the timing of any effective repentance payment and conduct the company’s tax court action alongside the criminal file. We work in English with foreign directors and group legal teams and arrange for the statement to be prepared with the interpreter in mind. The scope of the service is described on our fake invoice defence page (in Turkish), and the lawyer’s profile is on the author page. You can reach us on +90 554 648 37 15 before the date of the statement.

Frequently asked questions

What happens if I do not attend a statement in a Turkish fake invoice investigation?

The summons warns that a person who does not appear will be brought by force, and a suspect who does not comply may be ordered to be brought by force (CCP Arts. 145, 146(1)). If there is an excuse, it should be notified before the date and a new date requested.

The summons does not say whether I am a suspect or a witness. What should I do?

The summons must state the reason for the call (CCP Art. 145). If the capacity is not clear, it should be clarified before the statement with the investigation bureau or through counsel. A suspect is told of the rights in CCP Art. 147 at the start of the statement.

Do I need a lawyer to give a statement to a Turkish prosecutor?

It is not compulsory, but it is a right. The minimum penalties for TPL Art. 359 offences are below five years, so the rule on appointing counsel without a request does not apply (CCP Art. 150(3)); counsel must be requested. A lawyer’s right to be present during the statement cannot be restricted (CCP Art. 149(3)).

Will remaining silent count against me?

Silence is a statutory right for all questions other than identity (CCP Art. 147(1)(e); Constitution Art. 38(5)). Favourable facts, however, reach the file through an explanation or a written submission. If the documents are not ready, you can state that a detailed written explanation will follow.

Can my lawyer see the investigation file before the statement?

Yes. Defence counsel may review the file during the investigation and take copies (CCP Art. 153(1)). A restriction may be ordered only for the offences listed in CCP Art. 153(2); TPL offences are not on the list, while forming a criminal organisation is.

I gave a statement to the police without a lawyer. What now?

A statement taken by the police without counsel present cannot be the basis of a judgment unless confirmed before a judge or court (CCP Art. 148(4)). Points that were incomplete or wrongly recorded can be corrected by a written supplementary statement to the prosecutor.

Can I be arrested after giving a statement in a fake invoice case?

Arrest requires strong suspicion based on concrete evidence, a ground for arrest and proportionality (CCP Art. 100(1)–(2)). TPL offences are not among the catalogue offences for which a ground for arrest may be presumed (CCP Art. 100(3)). A judge may instead impose judicial control, including a travel ban (CCP Art. 109(3)(a)).

I am a foreign director and do not speak Turkish. How will the statement be taken?

If you do not know Turkish well enough to explain yourself, the prosecutor or the judge appoints an interpreter for the statement during the investigation (CCP Art. 202(1), (3)). Ask for the Turkish record to be translated back to you and correct any errors before signing (CCP Art. 147(1)(i)).

I live abroad and have been named as a suspect. What are my options?

Counsel can review the file under a power of attorney signed before a Turkish consulate, or before a local notary with an apostille. Turkish prosecutors may seek a statement through mutual legal assistance under Law No. 6706, including by video link (Art. 9). Any trip to Turkey should be planned with the travel ban risk in mind.

Can the prosecutor take statements before the tax report and opinion arrive?

Yes. Investigative steps can be taken, but no public case can be filed until the result of the examination and the opinion are notified (TPL Art. 367). No separate opinion is required for another person who committed the act covered by the opinion; whether this reaches a buyer when the opinion concerns only the seller is contested.

When should an effective repentance payment be made?

For the half reduction, payment must be made during the investigation stage, that is, before the court accepts the indictment. Payment during the prosecution stage before judgment gives a one-third reduction (TPL Art. 359; CCP Art. 2(1)(e)–(f)). A pending tax case does not prevent payment.

Our accountant has been summoned as a witness. Must he or she testify?

A certified public accountant may refuse to testify about client information learned professionally, but cannot refuse if the client consents (CCP Art. 46(1)(c), 46(2)). He or she may also refuse to answer questions that could expose him or her to prosecution (CCP Art. 48).

Is an explanation given to the tax inspector a statement?

In criminal procedure, a statement is taken by the police or the public prosecutor (CCP Art. 2(1)(g)). Explanations given during a tax examination are written into the examination records and form part of the basis of the tax crime report (TPL Art. 141), so those records should be reviewed before the criminal statement.

Who gives the statement on behalf of the company?

No one. Criminal sanctions cannot be imposed on legal entities (Criminal Code Art. 20(2)), and the penalties for Art. 359 acts are imposed on the individuals who commit them (TPL Art. 333(3)). The prosecutor summons the managers and employees thought to have taken part, each in his or her own name.

If a decision of non-prosecution is issued, can the file be reopened?

The victim may object within two weeks of notification (CCP Art. 173). Once the decision is final, a public case may be filed only on new evidence and a decision of the criminal judge of peace to that effect (CCP Art. 172(2)).

Related guides

• Fake Invoice Allegations and KURGAN Tax Audits in Turkey — the entry point to this series
• VAT Deduction Denied for Fake Invoices in Turkey: How the Assessment Is Calculated
• Personal Liability of Directors and Managers in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
• Suspects, Evidence and Assets Abroad: International Judicial Cooperation (Law No. 6706)
• Service of Documents in Turkish Proceedings
• Legal Guide for Foreign Investors in Turkey (Türkiye) 2026
• Fake Document Allegations and the Defence (in Turkish)
• Knowing or Unknowing Use of Fake Documents: Intent Criteria (in Turkish)
• Model Defence Petition in a Fake Invoice Criminal Case (in Turkish)
• Travel Bans in Turkish Fake Invoice Investigations
• Effective Repentance in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
• Objecting to a Non-Prosecution Decision under CCP Art. 173 (in Turkish)
• Fake Invoice and KURGAN Decision Tool (in Turkish)
• Amended Return or Defence after a KURGAN Letter in Turkey
• Supplier Due Diligence Against Fake Invoice Risk in Turkey
• Challenging a Fake Invoice Assessment in the Turkish Tax Court
• Precautionary Attachment in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
• Limitation Periods in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases