Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62013CN0033

Case C-33/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Łodzi (Poland) lodged on 22 January 2013 — Marcin Jagiełło v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi

OJ C 141, 18.5.2013, p. 8–8 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

18.5.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/8

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Łodzi (Poland) lodged on 22 January 2013 — Marcin Jagiełło v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi

(Case C-33/13)

2013/C 141/13

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Łodzi

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Marcin Jagiełło

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi

Questions referred

1.

Must Article 4(1) and (2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, (1) in conjunction with Article 5(1) thereof, be interpreted as meaning that a sale effected by a trader who, with the authorisation of another person, used the company name of that person to conceal its economic activity cannot be regarded as a supply of goods?

2.

Must Article 17 of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment be interpreted as meaning that tax cannot be deducted from an invoice issued by a person who merely acted as a front for the sale of goods effected by another trader, without it being demonstrated that the acquirer was aware, or on the basis of objective factors could have foreseen, that the transaction in which he was participating was connected with fraud or other irregularities committed by the issuer of the invoice or a trader working with him?

(1)  OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.

Top