Available languages

Taxonomy tags

Info

References in this case

Share

Highlight in text

Go

19.9.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/34

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 12 July 2016 — UAB ‘Toridas’ v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos and Kauno apskrities valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija

(Case C-386/16)

(2016/C 343/47)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: UAB ‘Toridas’

Other parties: Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos, Kauno apskrities valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija

Questions referred

1.

Must Articles 138(1), 140(a) and/or 141 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read, inter alia, in conjunction with Articles 33 and 40 thereof, be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those here at issue (in the main proceedings), the supply of goods by a taxable person who is established in the first Member State must be exempt under those provisions in the case where, before that supply transaction is entered into, the purchaser (that is to say, the person identified as being a taxable person in the second Member State) expresses an intention to sell the goods immediately, before transporting them from the first Member State, to a taxable person established in a third Member State, for whom those goods are transported (dispatched) to that third Member State?

2.

Is the answer to Question 1 affected by the fact that a portion of the goods was processed on the instructions of the taxable person established (identified for tax purposes) in the second Member State, prior to their being transported to the third Member State?

(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.