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
C/2024/6630
11.11.2024
(Case C-521/24, Aptiv Services Hungary)
(C/2024/6630)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Applicant: Aptiv Services Hungary Kft.
Defendant: Nemzeti Adó-és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
Must Articles 168(c) and 178(c) and (d) and Articles 179, 180, 181 and 182 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax and the principles of tax neutrality, proportionality and effectiveness be interpreted as meaning that the legislation and practice of a Member State are compatible with them where, according to that legislation and practice, the deduction of the input VAT in respect of intra-Community acquisitions of goods is refused and definitively excluded (no corrected return can be filed and the application for a special tax refund procedure is refused) on the ground that the taxable person, for administrative reasons, did not exercise its right to the deduction during the same tax period as that for which the tax due was calculated, although it did do so within the relevant time limit, in circumstances in which, in previous inspections, the tax authority of the Member State had not raised any objection to such exercise of the right?
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax and the principles of tax neutrality, proportionality and effectiveness (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6630/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
* * *
Language of the case: Hungarian.