# C_2017104EN.01002702.xml

| 3.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/27

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia (Romania) lodged on 21 December 2016 — Lucrețiu Hadrian Vădan v Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor and Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Brașov — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Alba

(Case C-664/16)

(2017/C 104/41)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Lucrețiu Hadrian Vădan

Appellant:

Respondents: Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor and Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Brașov — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Alba

Respondents:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | On a proper construction of Directive 2006/112 (1) in general, and Articles 167, 168, 178, 179 and 273 in particular, and the principles of proportionality and neutrality, may a taxable person who satisfies the substantive requirements for the deduction of VAT exercise his right to deduct in a situation where, in a particular context such as that of the dispute in the main proceedings, he is unable to provide evidence, by way of invoices, of input tax for the supply of goods and provision of services? |
| --- | --- |

1.

On a proper construction of Directive 2006/112 (1) in general, and Articles 167, 168, 178, 179 and 273 in particular, and the principles of proportionality and neutrality, may a taxable person who satisfies the substantive requirements for the deduction of VAT exercise his right to deduct in a situation where, in a particular context such as that of the dispute in the main proceedings, he is unable to provide evidence, by way of invoices, of input tax for the supply of goods and provision of services?

1

| 2. | If the first question is answered in the affirmative, on a proper construction of Directive 2006/112 and the principles of proportionality and neutrality, is an indirect assessment method (assessment by means of a court-commissioned expert report), employed by an independent expert and based on the amount of work/labour involved in the construction of buildings as stated in the report, an acceptable and appropriate measure for determining the extent of the right to deduct in a situation where the supply of goods (building material) and the provision of services (labour relating to the construction of buildings) originate from taxable persons liable to VAT? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question is answered in the affirmative, on a proper construction of Directive 2006/112 and the principles of proportionality and neutrality, is an indirect assessment method (assessment by means of a court-commissioned expert report), employed by an independent expert and based on the amount of work/labour involved in the construction of buildings as stated in the report, an acceptable and appropriate measure for determining the extent of the right to deduct in a situation where the supply of goods (building material) and the provision of services (labour relating to the construction of buildings) originate from taxable persons liable to VAT?

---

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

1

---