Order — ECLI:EU:C:2016:513
Date: 2016-06-30
Language of the case: Romanian
Court formation: Ninth Chamber
Subject matter: Taxation;Value added tax
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Romania

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție (Romania) lodged on 1 February 2016 — Evo Bus GmbH v Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Ploiești — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Argeș (Case C-55/16) Language of the case: Romanian Referring court Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: Evo Bus GmbH Defendant: Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Ploiești — Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Argeș Question referred Are the Eighth Directive (79/1072/EEC) 1 and the principle of fiscal neutrality to be interpreted as precluding/having precluded the legislation of a Member State which regulates/regulated, in the light of the principle that there should be certainty in tax matters, the conditions for eligibility for reimbursement of value added tax, such as, in the present case, the condition requiring proof of payment of the tax by suppliers? ____________ 1 Eighth Council Directive 79/1072/EEC of 6 December 1979 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the country (OJ 1979 L 331, p. 11).