This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62013CA0499
Case C-499/13: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Marian Macikowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax — Principles of proportionality and fiscal neutrality — Taxation of a supply of immovable property in a procedure for compulsory sale by auction — National legislation requiring the court enforcement officer executing such a sale to calculate and pay VAT on the transaction — Payment of the purchase price to the competent court and need for the VAT to be paid to be transferred by that court to the court enforcement officer — Liability for damages and criminal liability of the court enforcement officer for non-payment of VAT — Difference between the general statutory time-limit for the payment of VAT by a taxable person and the time-limit imposed on the court enforcement officer — Impossibility of deducting the input VAT paid)
Case C-499/13: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Marian Macikowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax — Principles of proportionality and fiscal neutrality — Taxation of a supply of immovable property in a procedure for compulsory sale by auction — National legislation requiring the court enforcement officer executing such a sale to calculate and pay VAT on the transaction — Payment of the purchase price to the competent court and need for the VAT to be paid to be transferred by that court to the court enforcement officer — Liability for damages and criminal liability of the court enforcement officer for non-payment of VAT — Difference between the general statutory time-limit for the payment of VAT by a taxable person and the time-limit imposed on the court enforcement officer — Impossibility of deducting the input VAT paid)
Case C-499/13: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Marian Macikowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax — Principles of proportionality and fiscal neutrality — Taxation of a supply of immovable property in a procedure for compulsory sale by auction — National legislation requiring the court enforcement officer executing such a sale to calculate and pay VAT on the transaction — Payment of the purchase price to the competent court and need for the VAT to be paid to be transferred by that court to the court enforcement officer — Liability for damages and criminal liability of the court enforcement officer for non-payment of VAT — Difference between the general statutory time-limit for the payment of VAT by a taxable person and the time-limit imposed on the court enforcement officer — Impossibility of deducting the input VAT paid)
OJ C 171, 26.5.2015, p. 3–4
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 26/03/2015
- Date lodged:
- 16/09/2013
- Author:
- Court of Justice
- Form:
- Judicial information
- Authentic language:
- Polish
- Type of procedure:
- Reference for a preliminary ruling
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Related EU case-law document 62013CJ0499
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
26.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 171/3 |
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Marian Macikowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku
(Case C-499/13) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax - Principles of proportionality and fiscal neutrality - Taxation of a supply of immovable property in a procedure for compulsory sale by auction - National legislation requiring the court enforcement officer executing such a sale to calculate and pay VAT on the transaction - Payment of the purchase price to the competent court and need for the VAT to be paid to be transferred by that court to the court enforcement officer - Liability for damages and criminal liability of the court enforcement officer for non-payment of VAT - Difference between the general statutory time-limit for the payment of VAT by a taxable person and the time-limit imposed on the court enforcement officer - Impossibility of deducting the input VAT paid))
(2015/C 171/04)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Marian Macikowski
Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Gdańsku
Operative part of the judgment
|
1) |
Articles 9, 193 and 199(1)(g) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national law, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, within the context of a sale of immovable property effected through enforcement, imposes on a person — namely the court enforcement officer who made the sale — obligations to calculate, collect and pay the value added tax on the proceeds of that transaction within the prescribed time-limits. |
|
2) |
The principle of proportionality must be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national law, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which a court enforcement officer must be liable with his entire assets for the amount of value added tax due on the proceeds of the sale of immovable property effected through enforcement where he does not discharge his obligation to collect and pay that tax, provided that the court enforcement officer concerned actually has all legal means to discharge that obligation, which it is for the referring court to determine. |
|
3) |
Articles 206, 250 and 252 of Directive 2006/112 and the principle of fiscal neutrality must be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national law, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which the paying agent as referred to in that provision is required to calculate, collect and pay an amount of value added tax on a sale of goods effected through enforcement without being able to deduct the amount of value added tax paid as input tax from the beginning of the tax period to the date of the collection of that tax from the taxable person. |
