EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-334/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Veszprémi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 23 July 2020 — Amper Metal Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CN0334

62020CN0334

July 23, 2020
With Google you find a lot.
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

7.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/14

(Case C-334/20)

(2020/C 423/22)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Amper Metal Kft.

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

Questions referred

1.Must, or may, Article 168(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (‘the VAT Directive’) be interpreted as meaning that, under the said provision, in view of its use of the expression ‘are used’, the right to deduct VAT cannot be refused in respect of a transaction that falls within the scope of the VAT Directive on the grounds that, in the opinion of the tax authorities, the service provided by the person issuing the invoice in the course of a transaction between independent parties is not ‘beneficial’ to the taxable activities of the recipient of the invoice, in that:

the value of the service (advertising) provided by the person issuing the invoice is disproportionate to the benefit (sales revenue/increase in sales revenue) which the service generates for the recipient; or

the said service (advertising) has not generated any sales revenue for the recipient?

2.Must, or may, Article 168(a) of the VAT Directive be interpreted as meaning that, under this provision, the right to deduct VAT may be refused in respect of a transaction that falls within the scope of the VAT Directive on the grounds that, in the opinion of the tax authorities, the service provided by the person issuing the invoice in the course of a transaction between independent parties is for a disproportionate sum, because the service (advertising) is expensive and the price is excessive in comparison with another service or services?

Language of the case: Hungarian

(1) OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia