EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-38/16: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 June 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Compass Contract Services Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Repayment of overpaid VAT — Right to deduct VAT — Procedures — Principles of equal treatment and fiscal neutrality — Principle of effectiveness — National legislation introducing a limitation period)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CA0038

62016CA0038

June 14, 2017
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

21.8.2017

Official Journal of the European Union

C 277/13

(Case C-38/16) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Repayment of overpaid VAT - Right to deduct VAT - Procedures - Principles of equal treatment and fiscal neutrality - Principle of effectiveness - National legislation introducing a limitation period))

(2017/C 277/17)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Compass Contract Services Limited

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Operative part of the judgment

The principles of fiscal neutrality, equal treatment and effectiveness do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, in the context of the reduction of the limitation period, on the one hand, for claims for overpaid value added tax and, on the other hand, for claims for deduction of input value added tax, provides different transitional periods, with the result that claims relating to two accounting periods of three months are subject to different limitation periods depending on whether they concern the repayment of overpaid value added tax or the deduction of input value added tax.

*

Language of the case: English.

ECLI:EU:C:2017:140

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia