The relevance of the chosen topic is due to the dynamics of relations in the areas of tax and customs law. The current norms of both tax and customs legislation are not devoid of drawbacks, because they change too quickly and frequently, are confusing and contain many declarative norms, which create many obstacles to the effective functioning of the spheres of taxation and customs. Therefore, it is necessary to observe repeatedly the presentation of new legal positions of the Supreme Court, in its judicial practices help to overcome latent shortcomings in the norms of current legislation.

The purpose of the article is to review and study the emerging new judicial practice in the legal positions on the implementation of calculations and taxation. Use of objects for their functional purpose, in the field of customs, in the field of control and supervision activities and delicacy, as well as judicial practice on procedural issues in the field of taxation and customs.

It is be established that the relevant judicial practice of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in the field of taxation and customs is focused on establishing the jurisdiction of relevant disputes, as well as on resolving current issues regarding the application of substantive or procedural law. The following approaches have been be formed by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in resolving substantive disputes in 2020. First, to the proper way of protection is to apply to the supervisory authority in court for the recovery of funds from the taxpayer who has a tax debt, from the accounts in banks serving such a taxpayer for tax debt or part thereof. Secondly, the status of an individual entrepreneur is a form of implementation of the constitutional right to entrepreneurial activity. The automatic transfer of the acquired characteristics to the changes of the business entity in 2004 is be excluded, as the person cannot be forced to exercise the right granted to him in these conditions, but uses it at his own discretion. Thirdly, in case of late or incomplete transfer of the amount of the tax liability due to the fault of the payer’s bank, such a payer is exempt from financial liability in the form of a fine and/or penalty, but is not exempt from the obligation to pay in full the tax liability.