da marjack bet： The Bianconeri have won a minor battle in their war against allegations of financial irregularities, but the fighting could continue into next season

da brwin： Just like the rest of us, Jose Mourinho knew what was coming.

The week before Juventus' appeal against a 15-point penalty deduction, the Portuguese manager was asked about Roma's strong position in Serie A.

"Are we third in the standings?" Mourinho asked on DAZN. "Are we sure that Juve don't have 59 points? We are in Italy…"

And so it unsurprisingly came to pass on Thursday afternoon that Juve's penalty was revoked, for the time being at least, and the table changed dramatically.

Juve jumped from eighth to third, pushing Mourinho's Roma down into the fourth and final Champions League spot, with AC Milan dropping to fifth, and Inter to sixth.

After leading the Old Lady past Sporting CP and into the semi-finals of the Europa League late in the evening, coach Massimiliano Allegri called it "a beautiful day" – and it was certainly positive from Juve's perspective.

However, Mourinho's colleague at Roma, sporting director Tiago Pinto, was less impressed and admitted to Sky Sport Italia: "I have to laugh, so I don't cry…"

Getty ImagesThe original ruling

The Bianconeri had initially been sanctioned in January for "financial irregularities" and "false accounting" in relation to past transfer dealings, such as the infamous swap deal involving Miralem Pjanic and Arthur Melo.

The severity of the sentence surprised many in the media, not least because the chief prosecutor had only requested a nine-point penalty.

Juve predictably appealed to CONI's (the Italian Olympic Committee) Collegio di Garanzia, the country's highest sporting court, with their lawyers claiming that the deduction and bans issued to 11 past or current club directors constituted "a clear disparity of treatment against Juventus and its managers compared any other company or member".

Remember, 11 clubs and 59 executives had been implicated during the original investigation into breaches of rules relating to 'plusvalenza' (capital gains) – essentially, allegations that clubs were inflating transfer fees in order to balance the books.

They were all initially cleared of any wrongdoing, partly because of the difficulty involved in objectively establishing the value of a footballer.

It was even revealed that prosecutors had relied too heavily on values derived by the website transfermakt.com, which hardly inspires confidence in the sporting justice system in Italy.

AdvertisementGetty ImagesNew evidence comes to light

The case was reopened, though, because of new evidence brought to light by the separate criminal investigation overseen by the Turin Public Prosecutor, called 'Prisma', which focuses on alleged breaches of "the integrity of sporting competition" and, far more significantly, false accounting related to salaries.

According to widespread reports, prosecutors came into possession of a 'black book' owned by former Juve sporting director Fabio Paratici, which allegedly contains all of the true numbers involved in the transfer deals at the centre of the affair.

It was also claimed that the investigators have unearthed admissions of guilt via wiretaps involving several Juventus directors, including former president Agnelli and CEO Maurizio Arrivabene.

Consequently, the FIGC prosecutor, Giuseppe Chine, appealed the previous ruling and the case was reopened in December.

This time around, only nine of the original 11 clubs were implicated, but Juve remained the focus of the investigation because of the apparent weight of evidence against them, and their allegedly repeated attempts to circumvent the plusvalenza regulations.

GettyA lack of clarity

However, during a three-hour hearing on Wednesday, CONI prosecutor Ugo Taucer admitted that the original ruling lacked a level of "clarity that must be appreciated and evaluated by a new judgement."

Essentially, the case will go back to the Italian Football Federation's (FIGC) Federal Court of Appeal.

The hope is that the matter will be resolved once and for all within a month – before the end of the Serie A season on June 4.

But there is no guarantee of that actually happening, not least because Juve could, in theory, take the case back to CONI if the FIGC appeal goes against them.

In such a nightmare scenario, the case would not only drag on into the summer but potentially into next season, evoking memories of the Calciopoli scandal of 2006.

GettyJuve have won the battle but not the war…

The net result is uncertainty, because every outcome is possible: the deduction could be quashed, reduced, upheld or even increased.

There's also the prospect of finishing in the top four of Serie A and yet being blocked by UEFA from competing in next season's Champions League if the club is subsequently found to have falsified its accounts.

So, while Juventus have effectively won a minor battle this week, the war is far from over, and not just because of the ongoing threat posed by the far more serious Prisma investigation.

As many financial experts have pointed out, the plusvalenza affair still might end badly for the Bianconeri, particularly as the FIGC has essentially been told through the CONI hearing where it needs to firm up its case.

We've also learned that if Juve are found guilty, any sanctions imposed will have to be consequential, making it highly unlikely that they'd be stripped of a top-four finish no matter what.