Judgment;Summary — ECLI:EU:C:2019:327
Date: 2019-04-11
Language of the case: Hungarian
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Subject matter: Taxation;Value added tax
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Hungary

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 11 December 2017 — PORR Építési Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (Case C-691/17) Language of the case: Hungarian Referring court Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: PORR Építési Kft. Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága Questions referred (1) Must the provisions of Directive 2006/112/EC, 1 in particular the principles of proportionality, fiscal neutrality and effectiveness, be interpreted as precluding a practice whereby, in circumstances not involving tax fraud, the national tax authorities, when calculating the tax, refuse the right to deduct that may be exercised on the basis of a VAT invoice issued in accordance with the ordinary taxation regime, because they consider that the invoice for the transaction ought to have been issued in accordance with the reverse charge procedure, and fail, before refusing the right to deduct, to examine – whether the issuer of the invoice can reimburse the recipient of the invoice the amount of VAT paid in error, or – whether the issuer of the invoice may lawfully (within the national legal framework) correct and regularise that invoice, and in this way obtain from the tax authorities reimbursement of the tax paid by him in error? (2) Must the provisions of Directive 2006/112/EC, in particular the provisions of proportionality, fiscal neutrality and effectiveness, be interpreted as precluding a practice whereby the national tax authorities, when calculating the tax, refuses the right to deduct that may be exercised on the basis of a VAT invoice issued in accordance with the ordinary taxation regime, because they consider that the invoice for the transaction ought to have been issued in accordance with the reverse charge procedure, and whereby those authorities, when charging the tax, do not order the recipient of the invoice to be reimbursed the tax paid in error, even though the issuer of the invoice has paid the amount of the VAT in those invoices to the revenue authorities? ____________ 1 Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax; (OJ 2006 L 347, p 1).