- 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-334/20: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 November 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Veszprémi Törvényszék — Hungary) — Amper Metal Kft v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 2 — Transaction subject to VAT — Concept — Article 168(a) and Article 176 — Right to deduct input VAT — Refusal — Advertising services categorised as excessively expensive and not beneficial by the tax authority — Lack of turnover generated by the taxable person)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CA0334
62020CA0334
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
31.1.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 51/11
(Case C-334/20) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 2 - Transaction subject to VAT - Concept - Article 168(a) and Article 176 - Right to deduct input VAT - Refusal - Advertising services categorised as excessively expensive and not beneficial by the tax authority - Lack of turnover generated by the taxable person)
(2022/C 51/13)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Amper Metal Kft
Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
Operative part of the judgment
Article 168(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that a taxable person may deduct input value added tax (VAT) paid for advertising services where such a supply of services constitutes a transaction subject to VAT within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2006/112, and has a direct and immediate link with one or more taxable output transactions or with the taxable person’s economic activity as a whole, by way of overheads, without it being necessary to take into account the fact that the price charged for such services is excessive in relation to a reference value defined by the national tax authorities or that those services have not given rise to an increase in the taxable person’s turnover.
(*) Language of the case: Hungarian.