14.8.2017

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/13

(Case C-364/17)

(2017/C 269/18)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ‘Varna Holideis’ EOOD

Defendant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ Varna pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite

Questions referred

1.Are Articles 90(1) and 185(1) of Directive 2006/112 (1) to be interpreted as requiring the deduction claimed for input tax on a supply also to be adjusted in a case, such as that in the dispute in the main proceedings, where the legal transaction in respect of which the right to deduct input tax was exercised has been declared null and void by a judgment having legal force or should one, in light of the definition in Article 14(1) of Directive 2006/112, proceed on the basis that there is no supply and the tax claim did not arise in the first place?

2.Is Article 185(1) and (2) of Directive 2006/112 to be interpreted as meaning that, in the absence of a national provision for the adjustment of deduction claimed in respect of input tax, and in the event of a court decision declaring a legal transaction null and void, the adjustment may be made by direct application of Article 90(1) of the directive?

Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.