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
(Case C-101/16) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Right to deduct - Conditions governing the exercise of that right - Article 273 - National measures - Fight against tax evasion and tax avoidance - Invoice issued by a taxpayer declared ‘inactive’ by the tax authorities - Risk of tax evasion - Refusal of the right to deduct - Proportionality - Refusal to take into account evidence of the absence of tax evasion or tax losses - Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment to be delivered - No limitation))
(2017/C 424/04)
Language of the case: Romanian
Applicant: SC Paper Consult SRL
Defendants: Direcția Regională a Finanțelor Publice Cluj-Napoca, Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Bistrița-Năsăud
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding national rules, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, under which the right to deduct value added tax is refused to a taxable person on the ground that the trader which supplied a service to that taxable person and issued a corresponding invoice, on which the expenditure and the value added tax are indicated separately, has been declared inactive by the tax authorities of a Member State, that declaration of inactivity being public and accessible on the internet to any taxable person in that State, in the case where that refusal of the right to deduct is systematic and final, making it impossible to adduce evidence that there was no tax evasion or loss of tax revenue.
(<span class="note">1</span>) OJ C 175, 17.5.2016.