This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62012CA0078
Case C-78/12: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — ‘Evita-K’ EOOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite (Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax — Supply of goods — Concept — Right to deduct — Refusal — Actual performance of a taxable transaction — Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 — System for the identification and registration of bovine animals — Ear tags)
Case C-78/12: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — ‘Evita-K’ EOOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite (Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax — Supply of goods — Concept — Right to deduct — Refusal — Actual performance of a taxable transaction — Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 — System for the identification and registration of bovine animals — Ear tags)
Case C-78/12: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — ‘Evita-K’ EOOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite (Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax — Supply of goods — Concept — Right to deduct — Refusal — Actual performance of a taxable transaction — Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 — System for the identification and registration of bovine animals — Ear tags)
IO C 260, 7.9.2013, p. 11–11
(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:
- 18/07/2013
- Date lodged:
- 14/02/2012
- Author:
- An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Bulgáiris
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
7.9.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 260/11 |
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — ‘Evita-K’ EOOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
(Case C-78/12) (1)
(Directive 2006/112/EC - Common system of value added tax - Supply of goods - Concept - Right to deduct - Refusal - Actual performance of a taxable transaction - Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 - System for the identification and registration of bovine animals - Ear tags)
2013/C 260/19
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Referring court
Administrativen sad Sofia-grad
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant:‘Evita-K’ EOOD
Defendant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
Re:
Request for a preliminary ruling — Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Interpretation of Articles 14(1), 178(a), 185(1), 226(6) and 242 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Right to deduct input VAT on the purchase of animals — Proof of actual delivery of the goods — Whether or not there is an obligation to indicate in the invoices the ear tags of animals subject to identification under EU veterinary legislation — Whether or not there is an obligation to prove the supplier’s ownership
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of the exercise of the right to deduct value added tax, the concept of ‘supply of goods’ for the purposes of that directive and evidence that such a supply has in fact been carried out are not linked to the form of the acquisition of a right of ownership of the goods concerned. It is for the referring court to carry out, in accordance with the national rules relating to evidence, an overall assessment of all the facts and circumstances of the dispute before it in order to determine whether the supplies of goods at issue in the main proceedings were actually carried out and whether, as the case may be, a right to deduct may be exercised on the basis of those supplies. |
|
2. |
Article 242 of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not require taxable persons who are not agricultural producers to show in their accounts the subject-matter of the supplies of goods which they make, when animals are concerned, and to prove that those animals were subject to control in accordance with International Accounting Standard 41 ‘Agriculture’. |
|
3. |
Article 226(6) of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not require a taxable person who carries out supplies of goods concerning animals, which are subject to the identification and registration system established by Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1791/2006 of 20 November 2006, to mention the ear tags of those animals on the invoices relating to those supplies. |
|
4. |
Article 185(1) of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as allowing a deduction of value added tax to be adjusted only if the taxable person concerned previously benefitted from a right to deduct that tax under the conditions laid down in Article 168(a) of that directive. |
