- 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-262/24, Pegazus Busz: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék – Hungary) – Pegazus Busz Fuvarozó Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Manifest inadmissibility – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law – Taxation – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Right to deduct input VAT – Refusal – Tax avoidance – Obligations of the taxable person – Burden of proof – Principles of proportionality and legal certainty – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Contradiction between national case-law and EU law – Article 267 TFEU – Primacy of EU law – Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CB0262
62024CB0262
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 series
—
C/2025/2636
19.5.2025
(Case C-262/24,
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Manifest inadmissibility - Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law - Taxation - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Right to deduct input VAT - Refusal - Tax avoidance - Obligations of the taxable person - Burden of proof - Principles of proportionality and legal certainty - Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Contradiction between national case-law and EU law - Article 267 TFEU - Primacy of EU law - Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling)
(C/2025/2636)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Pegazus Busz Fuvarozó Kft.
Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
Operative part of the order
The Court of Justice of the European Union manifestly lacks jurisdiction to answer the first, second and third questions, with the exception of point (c) of the first question, referred by the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest High Court, Hungary), by decision of 29 February 2024.
The right to a fair trial, enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that its observance requires that the taxable person be apprised of and be able to discuss, in inter partes proceedings, evidence on which the tax authority relies in order to find that that taxable person is participating in value added tax avoidance.
The request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest High Court) is manifestly inadmissible as regards the fourth question referred by that court.
The principle of primacy of EU law and Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a national court ruling on remittal, after the setting aside of a decision in appeal proceedings brought on a point of law – in the context of which it is required, under national law, to follow the guidance provided in the remittal decision – is nevertheless under an obligation to deviate from that guidance if it deems it, in particular in the light of the case-law of the Court, to be contrary to EU law, without that court being required to refer a question to the Court for a preliminary ruling.
—
(1) OJ C C/2024/3749.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2636/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—