Available languages

Taxonomy tags

Info

References in this case

Share

Highlight in text

Go

8.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/19

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 23 November 2015 — Litdana UAB v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

(Case C-624/15)

(2016/C 048/26)

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

Questions referred

1.

Under Articles 314(a) and 226(11) of Directive 2006/112 (1) and under Articles 314(d) and 226(14) of that directive, are national rules and/or national practice founded on those rules allowed that prevent a taxable person from applying the VAT margin scheme because it becomes apparent upon a tax inspection carried out by the tax authority that incorrect information/data on the application of the VAT margin scheme and/or on exemption from VAT was provided in the VAT invoices for the goods supplied, but the taxable person did not know and could not have known about that?

2.

Is Article 314 of Directive 2006/112 to be understood and interpreted as meaning that, although the VAT invoice states that the goods are exempt from VAT (Article 226(11) of Directive 2006/112) and/or the seller has applied the margin scheme in order to supply the goods (Article 226(14) of Directive 2006/112), the taxable person acquires the right to apply the VAT margin scheme only when the supplier of the goods actually applies the margin scheme and duly discharges his obligations in the sphere of payment of VAT (pays VAT on the margin in his State)?

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).