- 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-146/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bucureşti (Romania) lodged on 3 March 2021 — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti — Administraţia Sector 1 a Finanţelor Publice v VB, Direcţia Generalā Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti — Serviciul Soluţionare Contestaţii 1
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CN0146
62021CN0146
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 228/19
(Case C-146/21)
(2021/C 228/24)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti — Administraţia Sector 1 a Finanţelor Publice
Respondents: VB, Direcţia Generalā Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti — Serviciul Soluţionare Contestaţii 1
Question referred
In circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, do Directive 2006/112/EC (1) and the principle of neutrality preclude national legislation or a tax practice in accordance with which the reverse charge mechanism (simplification measures), which is mandatory for the sale of standing timber, is not applicable to a person who has been the subject of an inspection and who has been registered for VAT purposes following that inspection, on the grounds that the person subject to the inspection had neither applied for nor obtained registration for VAT purposes either before the transactions were carried out or by the date on which the upper limit [for exemption] was exceeded?
(1) Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).