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
(Case C-159/17)
(2017/C 221/06)
Language of the case: Romanian
Appellant: Întreprinderea Individuală Dobre M. Marius
Respondents: Ministerul Finanțelor Publice — Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Galați — Serviciul Soluționare Contestații, Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Galați — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Constanța — Serviciul Inspecție Fiscală Persoane Fizice
Must Articles 167, 168, 169, 179, 213(1), 214(1)(a) and 273 of Directive 2006/112/EC be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, in circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, requires a taxpayer, whose registration for VAT purposes has been revoked, to pay to the State the VAT collected during the period in which the VAT identification code was revoked, without, however, recognising his right to deduct the VAT relating to purchases made during that period?
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
* * *