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
()
(2010/C 288/44)
Language of the case: Italian
Applicant: Banca Antoniana Popolare Veneta spa, incorporating Banca Nazionale Dell’Agricoltura spa
Defendants: Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Entrate
1.Do the principles of effectiveness, non-discrimination and tax neutrality in respect of value added tax preclude a national framework or practice that construes the right of the purchaser/client to reimbursement of VAT paid in error as a right to a payment due under the ordinary law, unlike that exercised by the principal debtor (supplier/provider of the service), with a time limit for the former significantly longer than that applied to the latter, such that the claim of the purchaser/client, brought when the time limit for the supplier/provider of the service has already expired, can give rise to an order for reimbursement against the latter, who can no longer claim reimbursement from the tax authority, and with no provision for any bridging instrument to prevent conflicts or disputes between the proceedings brought or to be brought before the various courts?
2.Furthermore, are the above-mentioned principles compatible with a national practice or case-law that allows a reimbursement order to be made in favour of the purchaser/client against the supplier/provider of the service that has not brought its reimbursement claim before another court within the time limits imposed on it, relying on a judicial interpretation, implemented by administrative practice, that the transaction was subject to VAT?