Payments totaling more than €101,000 for concrete supplies, transactions without invoices, lump-sum charges issued retroactively, and a receipt for €8,000 that was found forgotten in a drawer, set the stage for the new testimony presented before the Nicosia Criminal Court in the case of the Holy Monastery of Saint Avvakum.
The testimonies of four witnesses brought to light financial transactions with suppliers, cash payments, and questions regarding the issuance of receipts and invoices.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
During the proceedings, the testimonies of two businessmen stood out; they had been at the center of an investigation into offenses involving, among other things, fraudulent evasion of VAT and failure to issue valid receipts.
Their testimony raised a series of questions during cross-examination, with the defense challenging both the manner in which the transactions were recorded and the explanations provided.
€101,230 in cash for concrete
At the center of the proceedings was the testimony of the director of a concrete company, whose initials are S.K., who referred to his company’s transactions with the Monastery, which, as he said, began on June 20, 2022
As he stated, a person coordinating the work at the Monastery contacted him and informed him that there was a request from the then-abbot, Nektarios, not to issue invoices for subsequent concrete ordersin order to avoid, according to what he was told, paying VAT.
The witness claimed that he agreed to the request, citing his relationship with the church and his desire to help the monastery.
According to his testimony, the company made 12 concrete deliveries in 2022, another 18 in 2023, and two more in 2024. For these deliveries, with the exception of the last one, invoices were not initially issued, while payments were made gradually and exclusively in cash by the person coordinating the work.
Subsequently, the company issued summary invoices for the years 2022 and 2023, which were submitted to the accounting department and subsequently to the auditing firm for the relevant entries and VAT settlement.
During his testimony, he referred to the amounts that had been paid. For the first invoice, as mentioned, €101,230.92 had been collected in cash in installments, while for the second, the amount totaled €9,512.94, also in cash.
Questions Regarding Fictitious Invoices and Missing Delivery Notes
The lawyer for the first defendant, Kostis Efstathiou.
During cross-examination, Mr. Efstathiou argued that the invoices in question did not correspond to specific deliveries, but had been issued retroactively to account for quantities of materials for which the necessary supporting documents had not previously existed.
Mr. Efstathiou emphasized the absence of waybills, which could have documented the transport and delivery of the materials. The attorney questioned whether the quantities and monetary amounts listed on the invoices corresponded to actual transactions.
At the same time, he raised questions regarding the date of issuance of the invoices in question, seeking to establish whether they were issued before or after the start of the police investigation and the filing of charges against the witness.
Another point of the cross-examination concerned the witness’s claim that the person coordinating the work at the monastery had asked him not to issue invoices for subsequent orders related to work at the monastery, in order, according to this claim, to avoid tax liability.
Mr. Efstathiou categorically rejected this version of events, arguing that the person in question never gave such an instruction and that the decision not to issue invoices was the witness’s own choice.
The evidence regarding concrete quantities for the years 2022 and 2023 also played a significant role in the cross-examination. Mr. Efstathiou raised the issue of the stated quantity of 1,231 cubic meters, at a price of €63 per cubic meter, and a total amount which, according to his report, amounted to approximately 98,000 euros.
The question he posed to the witness was how it was possible to specify such a precise total amount when issuing the invoice, when he himself had stated in his testimony that he was unable to know the exact quantities of concrete that had been delivered to the Monastery without first reviewing the company’s accounting records.
The cross-examination concluded with Mr. Efstathiou presenting the witness with the claim that quantities of materials from various projects were consolidated into a single invoice and charged to the Monastery, without any documentation showing that they corresponded to specific deliveries.
The €8,000 receipt found forgotten in a drawer
A second testimony brought to light sales of wood-burning stoves and stone to the Monastery, as well as an €8,000 receipt, which the witness claimed to have discovered later in an old receipt pad in his office.
The second businessman, the director of a company that supplied stone to the Monastery, described a series of transactions that took place from 2021 to 2023.
As he testified, on August 5, 2021, he sold a wood-burning stove worth €2,000, with payment made by check. Nineteen days later, on August 24, another wood-burning stove, valued at €3,600, was sold; according to him, Nektarios paid for it so that it could be transported to the Metropolis of Morphou.
This was followed by sales of stone valued at €2,177.67 in August 2021, €5,000 in July 2023, and €4,000 in August of the same year.
The witness stated that, following an initial review of his records, these were the transactions he recalled having carried out on behalf of the Monastery.
In a supplemental statement to the police on June 27, 2024, he stated that after his first statement on June 19, he returned to his office and conducted a more detailed review of his records.
Then, as he said, he found a receipt book in a drawer that he had forgotten about.
Inside, he found a receipt dated November 16, 2022, in the amount of €8,000, for the supply of stone to the Holy Monastery of Saint Avvakum.
According to the witness, it was a receipt pad without his company’s pre-printed information, which he had purchased in 2019 and used occasionally.
He claimed that he remembered issuing that specific receipt and that he had handed it over to the person coordinating the work at the monastery.
He added, in fact, that the receipt in question had already been given to his accountant to be entered into the company’s accounting records.
The €3,600 wood-burning stove and the Metropolis of Morphou
During cross-examination of the second witness, Mr. Efstathiou returned to the subject of the sale of the €3,600 wood-burning stove, which the witness had stated was paid for by Nektarios and was intended for the Metropolis of Morphou.
The discussion expanded to include the circumstances of that specific transaction, as well as the witness’s statements regarding the Metropolitan of Morphou and individuals in his inner circle.
As he stated, during a social gathering he had with the Metropolitan of Morphou, the latter denied having made the specific contribution.
When asked, finally, whether people from the Monastery had asked him not to issue invoices or receipts for their transactions, he replied in the negative, clarifying that no such request had ever been made to him.
Rent of €1,750 and cash payments
A.M., the tenant of a mini-market owned by Nektarios, also testified before the court, stating that the monthly rent amounts to €1,750.
As he explained, payments had recently been made in cash after he was informed that the owner’s bank account had been frozen.
The witness also stated that he has receipts for the rent payments.
€1,000 for an icon painting that was never completed
The final testimony concerned a contribution of €1,000 for the icon painting of the Apostle Barnabas.
A.K. testified that she visited the monastery on January 22, 2024, to contribute to the icon painting.
As she explained, she agreed on the amount with the monastery’s accountant, Georgia, initially paying €100, while the remaining €900 would be paid via bank transfer.
According to her testimony, the accountant informed her that she did not have a receipt book at that time and later sent her the bank details for the payment.
During his cross-examination, Mr. Efstathiou stated that the icon had been ordered on January 23, 2024, however, it was not possible to install it at the monastery due to the events that followed.
The witness expressed her dissatisfaction that the icon was not completed, requesting a refund.
The proceedings before the Criminal Court will resume on November 11, 2026, at 9:30 a.m.
It should be noted that all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by the Court.
Source: CNA
