How to get a cash-register model approved for sale in Armenia

Documents and samples

Annex 1, point 1 prescribes two things, delivered together:

• An application on standard form N 1. The form is an annex to N 812-Լ, inside the same DOCX (or 2022 PDF), so there is no separate form file to find. Fields are minimal: TIN, taxpayer name, registered address, activity address, phone, email, the model name(s) being submitted, the factory number(s), and a signature line for the executive. The supporting documents listed on the form are: the model's technical passport, the manufacturer authorisation form (MAF), and the software description (technical task).
• Two physical sample units of each model, hand-delivered to the SRC's in-house IT body «Ջի Սոլյուշնս» (G-Solutions). Not to be confused with the older SNCO «Cash Register Implementation Office» — that one was dissolved in December 2021. G-Solutions is the SRC's IT non-commercial organisation, established in 2024. Order N 1720-Լ of 25 December 2024 made G-Solutions the receiving body for samples; before that, the original 2022 text of N 812-Լarchive addressed samples to the SRC's own Information Technologies Department («ՊԵԿ-ի Տեղեկատվական տեխնոլոգիաների վարչություն» — Annex 1 §1), a structural unit inside SRC rather than a separate legal entity.

The application package is filed on paper. Inside SRC, the working-group leader then circulates the documents to the rest of the working group through the Mulberry document-management system (point 4). Samples stay physical and outside Mulberry.

If anything in the package is missing or incomplete, SRC asks for the missing piece (point 5). The 15-working-day review period only starts once the package is complete.

Who checks the model

The reviewing body is a working group appointed by the SRC chair through a separate order (point 2). That separate order determines the membership; we have not located the current order in public sources, so the present member list is not on the public record. Until the SRC chair changes that separate order, the appointed group is the one that reviews submissions.

Two people who are not members of the working group can still take part in a session (point 3):

• An external technical expert can be brought in for an opinion on device characteristics, at the working group's discretion.
• The applicant can attend the session reviewing their own submission — useful for technical questions or on-the-spot clarifications.

Review timeline

1. 15 working days from the complete-package date for the review itself (point 6): physical-sample testing, network-communication testing, conformity check against Annex 1 of N 1976-Ն, review of the software description against the technical task, sub-program operation check, transaction-data transmission test against the tax authority's information base, and integration compatibility with external commercial software.
2. + 2 working days to draft the working-group protocol (point 7), which must spell out the grounds for compliance or non-compliance — refusal is always reasoned, and the grounds appear in the protocol.
3. + 1 working day for the working-group leader to respond to the applicant (points 9–10).

Minimum end-to-end time to the written response on the main path: 18 working days (about four calendar weeks). The assessment document itself is provided free of charge within two working days after the protocol date, so if you count document receipt, budget up to 19 working days from a complete package. Add roughly ten more working days if the device gets a preliminary assessment and needs the non-cash-payment re-check.

Voting and transparency

Point 8 sets two rules for the decision:

• All members must sign the protocol before any conclusion or refusal is issued. The protocol records the grounds for conformity or non-conformity; the applicant-facing route is the leader's written response, not a public vote sheet.
• The threshold for an assessment is 70% — a full or preliminary conformity assessment is considered adopted if 70% or more of the members support it. A refusal follows if the protocol records non-conformity.

The protocol itself is not part of SRC's regular public publication set. The applicant gets the working-group leader's written response, which references the protocol but is not the protocol. If you need the protocol or internal vote detail for an appeal, request it through the formal freedom-of-information process under the Law on Freedom of Information, not through SRC's regular publication channels.

Possible outcomes

• Full conformity assessment (form N 2) — if the device meets all requirements, including non-cash-payment acceptance. The model can be sold or leased from this point.
• Preliminary conformity assessment (form N 3) — if the device passes everything except the non-cash-payment requirements. Until that gap is closed, the model cannot be sold or leased (point 13). The applicant notifies SRC after the software update; the software on the samples is updated; ten working days later the working group runs the non-cash check again (point 14). If the device passes, the full assessment is issued.
• Refusal — if the device fails. One of the two samples is returned to the applicant in person; the second stays at SRC (point 10).

Samples that pass are kept at SRC for seven years (point 11).

Cost

Point 12 of Annex 1 is explicit: the conformity assessment itself is provided to the applicant free of charge ("ԱՆՎՃԱՐ"). N 812-Լ does not introduce a filing fee either, and Armenia's Law on State Duty does not list cash-register conformity assessment as a fee-bearing action. So, as of this writing, there is no state fee for filing or for receiving the assessment. For case-specific written confirmation, ask SRC in writing or use its official-clarifications channel; the Tax Code protects taxpayers who act in line with official clarifications.

After full approval

After every sale or lease, the seller has one working day (point 17) to send SRC's Taxpayer Service Department an xls or xlsx file with the buyer's or lessee's data: TIN, factory numbers of the units, models, and year of manufacture.

Beyond reading the order itself, keep four practical anchors in view:

1. Read the technical decree (N 1976-Ն) end to end, including all nine annexes. If you are not fluent in Armenian, work with a translator who handles legal and technical text.
2. Build a working integration using the protocol manual on the SRC's HDM page. The working group will have nothing to test on your sample unit otherwise.
3. For case-specific questions, file a written enquiry with SRC through its official clarifications channel and keep the answer with your compliance file; reliance on official clarifications is protected under the Tax Code.
4. Talk to a company on the current list, but set expectations. They have practical experience the order itself does not capture: what the working group actually tested, how a refusal was worded, what shifted between submission rounds. They are also your future competitors in a small, regulated market with one gatekeeper, so do not expect a ready-made playbook. Technical and protocol questions are more likely to get answered than questions about regulatory practice. Pick someone whose product targets a different segment from yours if you can.