- 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-844/19: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 May 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — CS, Finanzamt Österreich, Dienststelle Graz-Stadt, formerly Finanzamt Graz-Stadt v Finanzamt Österreich, Dienststelle Judenburg Liezen, formerly Finanzamt Judenburg Liezen, technoRent International GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 90 — Reduction of the taxable amount — Article 183 — Refund of excess VAT — Default interest — No national rule — Principle of fiscal neutrality — Direct effect of provisions of EU law — Principle that national law must be interpreted in conformity with EU law)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CA0844
62019CA0844
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 278/9
(Case C-844/19) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 90 - Reduction of the taxable amount - Article 183 - Refund of excess VAT - Default interest - No national rule - Principle of fiscal neutrality - Direct effect of provisions of EU law - Principle that national law must be interpreted in conformity with EU law)
(2021/C 278/11)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: CS, Finanzamt Österreich, Dienststelle Graz-Stadt, formerly Finanzamt Graz-Stadt
Defendants: Finanzamt Österreich, Dienststelle Judenburg Liezen, formerly Finanzamt Judenburg Liezen, technoRent International GmbH
Operative part of the judgment
Article 90(1) and Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with the principle of fiscal neutrality, must be interpreted as meaning that a refund resulting from an adjustment of the taxable amount under Article 90(1) of that directive must, like a refund of excess value added tax under Article 183 of that directive, give rise to the payment of interest where it is not made within a reasonable period of time. It is for the referring court to do whatever lies within its jurisdiction to give full effect to those provisions by interpreting national law in conformity with EU law.
(1) OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.
* Language of the case: German.