EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020CA0080
Case C-80/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Bucureşti — Romania) — Wilo Salmson France SAS v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti –- Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Articles 167 to 171 and Article 178(a) — Right to deduct VAT — Refund of VAT to taxable persons established in a Member State other than the Member State of refund — Possession of an invoice — Directive 2008/9/EC — Rejection of a refund application — ‘Cancellation’ of the invoice by the supplier — Issuing of a new invoice — New refund application — Rejection)
Case C-80/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Bucureşti — Romania) — Wilo Salmson France SAS v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti –- Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Articles 167 to 171 and Article 178(a) — Right to deduct VAT — Refund of VAT to taxable persons established in a Member State other than the Member State of refund — Possession of an invoice — Directive 2008/9/EC — Rejection of a refund application — ‘Cancellation’ of the invoice by the supplier — Issuing of a new invoice — New refund application — Rejection)
Case C-80/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Bucureşti — Romania) — Wilo Salmson France SAS v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti –- Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Articles 167 to 171 and Article 178(a) — Right to deduct VAT — Refund of VAT to taxable persons established in a Member State other than the Member State of refund — Possession of an invoice — Directive 2008/9/EC — Rejection of a refund application — ‘Cancellation’ of the invoice by the supplier — Issuing of a new invoice — New refund application — Rejection)
OJ C 513, 20.12.2021, p. 10–11
(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:
- 21/10/2021
- Date lodged:
- 12/02/2020
- Author:
- Court of Justice
- Form:
- Judicial information
- Authentic language:
- Romanian
- Type of procedure:
- Reference for a preliminary ruling
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Related EU case-law document 62020CJ0080
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
20.12.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 513/10 |
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Bucureşti — Romania) — Wilo Salmson France SAS v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti –- Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi
(Case C-80/20) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 167 to 171 and Article 178(a) - Right to deduct VAT - Refund of VAT to taxable persons established in a Member State other than the Member State of refund - Possession of an invoice - Directive 2008/9/EC - Rejection of a refund application - ‘Cancellation’ of the invoice by the supplier - Issuing of a new invoice - New refund application - Rejection)
(2021/C 513/16)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Tribunalul Bucureşti
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Wilo Salmson France SAS
Defendants: Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti –- Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Articles 167 to 171 and 178 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 and Council Directive 2008/9/EC of 12 February 2008 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112, to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State must be interpreted as meaning that the right to a refund of value added tax (VAT) charged on a supply of goods cannot be exercised by a taxable person established not in the Member State of refund but in another Member State, if that taxable person does not hold an invoice, within the meaning of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2010/45, relating to the purchase of the goods concerned. Only if a document is so flawed as to deprive the national tax administration of the information necessary to support a refund claim can such a document be considered not to be an ‘invoice’ within the meaning of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2010/45. |
|
2. |
Articles 167 to 171 and 178 of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2010/45, and the first of the situations referred to in Article 14(1)(a) of Directive 2008/9 must be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the rejection of an application for a refund of value added tax (VAT) relating to a given refund period solely on the ground that that VAT became chargeable during an earlier refund period, even though it was invoiced only during that given period. |
|
3. |
Articles 167 to 171 and 178 of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2010/45 and Directive 2008/9 must be interpreted as meaning that the unilateral cancellation of an invoice by a supplier, after the adoption by the Member State of refund of a decision rejecting the application for a refund of value added tax (VAT), which was based on that invoice, and when that decision has already become final, followed by the issuing by that supplier, during a subsequent refund period, of a new invoice relating to the same supplies, without those supplies being called into question, has no bearing on the existence of the right to a refund of VAT which has already been exercised or on the period in respect of which that right must be exercised. |
