This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015CA0624
Case C-624/15: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 May 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — ‘Litdana’ UAB v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 314 — Margin scheme — Conditions under which it is applicable — Refusal by the national tax authorities to grant a taxable person the right to apply the margin scheme — References on the invoices relating both to the application of the margin scheme by the supplier and to exemption from VAT — Margin scheme not applied by the supplier to the supply — Indications giving grounds for suspecting an infringement or fraud in the supply)
Case C-624/15: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 May 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — ‘Litdana’ UAB v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 314 — Margin scheme — Conditions under which it is applicable — Refusal by the national tax authorities to grant a taxable person the right to apply the margin scheme — References on the invoices relating both to the application of the margin scheme by the supplier and to exemption from VAT — Margin scheme not applied by the supplier to the supply — Indications giving grounds for suspecting an infringement or fraud in the supply)
Case C-624/15: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 May 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — ‘Litdana’ UAB v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 314 — Margin scheme — Conditions under which it is applicable — Refusal by the national tax authorities to grant a taxable person the right to apply the margin scheme — References on the invoices relating both to the application of the margin scheme by the supplier and to exemption from VAT — Margin scheme not applied by the supplier to the supply — Indications giving grounds for suspecting an infringement or fraud in the supply)
IO C 239, 24.7.2017, p. 7–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
24.7.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 239/7 |
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 May 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — ‘Litdana’ UAB v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos
(Case C-624/15) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 314 - Margin scheme - Conditions under which it is applicable - Refusal by the national tax authorities to grant a taxable person the right to apply the margin scheme - References on the invoices relating both to the application of the margin scheme by the supplier and to exemption from VAT - Margin scheme not applied by the supplier to the supply - Indications giving grounds for suspecting an infringement or fraud in the supply))
(2017/C 239/09)
Language of the case: Lithuanian
Referring court
Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant:‘Litdana’ UAB
Defendant: Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos
Third party: Klaipėdos apskrities valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija
Operative part of the judgment
Article 314 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, must be interpreted as precluding the competent authorities of a Member State from denying a taxable person the right to apply the margin scheme where he received an invoice that includes references relating both to the margin scheme and to exemption from value added tax (VAT), even if it is apparent from a subsequent check carried out by those authorities that the taxable dealer supplying the second-hand goods had not actually applied that scheme to the supply of those goods, unless it is established by the competent authorities that the taxable person did not act in good faith or did not take every reasonable measure in his power to satisfy himself that the transaction carried out by him does not result in his participation in tax evasion — a matter which it is for the referring court to determine.