- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-313/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia (Romania) lodged on 7 June 2013 — Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice a Județului Sibiu — Activitatea de Inspecție Fiscală v Cătălin Ienciu
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CN0313
62013CN0313
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 226/7
(Case C-313/13)
(2013/C 226/12)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice a Județului Sibiu — Activitatea de Inspecție Fiscală
Defendant: Cătălin Ienciu
Question referred
If a vendor has been reclassified as a taxable person for VAT purposes and the consideration for (price of) the supply of the immovable property has been determined by the parties, without any reference to VAT, must Articles 73 and 78 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC be interpreted as meaning that the taxable amount is:
(a) the consideration for (price of) the supply of the property determined by the parties, less the rate of VAT, or
(b) the consideration for (price of) the supply of the property agreed by the parties?
Council Directive of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).