- 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-358/20: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 18 November 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Oradea — Romania) — Promexor Trade SRL v Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Cluj — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Bihor (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Right to deduct VAT — Revocation of the VAT identification of a taxable person — Refusal of the right of deduction — Formal requirements)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CA0358
62020CA0358
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
17.1.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 24/7
(Case C-358/20) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Harmonisation of fiscal legislation - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Right to deduct VAT - Revocation of the VAT identification of a taxable person - Refusal of the right of deduction - Formal requirements)
(2022/C 24/09)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Promexor Trade SRL
Defendant: Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Cluj — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Bihor
Operative part of the judgment
Article 168, Article 213(1), Article 214(1) and Article 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010 and the principle of value added tax (VAT) neutrality, read in the light of the principles of legal certainty, the protection of legitimate expectations and proportionality, must be interpreted as not precluding, where the identification of a taxable person for VAT purposes has been revoked because no taxable transactions have been indicated in the VAT returns filed for six consecutive months but where that taxable person continues his or her activities notwithstanding that revocation, national legislation under which the competent tax authority may require that taxable person to pay the VAT due on his or her taxed transactions, provided that he or she can re-register for VAT purposes and deduct the input VAT paid. The fact that the director of the taxable person is a partner in another company which is the subject to insolvency proceedings cannot, in itself, be put forward to systematically refuse the re-registration of that taxable person for VAT purposes.
(1)
OJ C 378, 9.11.2020.
Language of the case: Romanian
ECLI:EU:C:2022:140