Case C-696/22, C (Court-appointed administrators and liquidators): Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 13 June 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj – Romania) – C SPRL v Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice (AJFP) Cluj, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice (DGRFP) Cluj-Napoca (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 64(1) and (2) – Applicability – Services of court-appointed administrators and liquidators – Continuous supply of services – Article 168(a) – Deduction of input VAT – Expenditure relating to the right to use a trade name – Rights of the defence – Right to be heard)
Date: 2024-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, financial solvency, liquidation, payment, provision of services, remuneration of work, rights of the defence, tax law








C_202404559EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/4559


29.7.2024






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 13 June 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj – Romania) – C SPRL v Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice (AJFP) Cluj, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice (DGRFP) Cluj-Napoca


(Case C-696/22,
                (1)
C (Court-appointed administrators and liquidators))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 64(1) and (2) - Applicability - Services of court-appointed administrators and liquidators - Continuous supply of services - Article 168(a) - Deduction of input VAT - Expenditure relating to the right to use a trade name - Rights of the defence - Right to be heard)
(C/2024/4559)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: C SPRL

Defendants: Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice (AJFP) Cluj, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice (DGRFP) Cluj-Napoca

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 64 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2008/117/EC of 16 December 2008,
must be interpreted as meaning that the continuous supply of services over a certain period, such as those carried out, under Romanian law, by court-appointed administrators and liquidators for the benefit of undertakings which are the subject of insolvency proceedings, falls within the scope of Article 64(1) of that directive, in so far as, subject to investigations to be carried out by the referring court, those services give rise to successive statements of account or successive payments.










2.


Article 64(1) of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2008/117,
must be interpreted as meaning that in a situation where payment of remuneration for services falling within the scope of that provision cannot take place because there are insufficient funds in the debtor’s accounts, that provision does not permit the inference that value added tax becomes chargeable only at the time when the remuneration is actually received.










3.


Article 168(a) of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2008/117,
must be interpreted as meaning that in order to establish that there is a direct and immediate link between a particular input transaction, on the one hand, and the output transactions giving rise to the right of deduction, on the other, it is necessary to determine the objective content of those transactions, which entails considering all the circumstances surrounding those transactions, that is to say, in particular, the actual use of the goods and services purchased by the taxable person as inputs and the exclusive reason for that purchase, the increase in turnover or the increase in the volume of taxable transactions not being relevant in that regard.










4.


The general EU-law principle of respect for the rights of the defence
must be interpreted as meaning that in the context of an administrative complaint procedure against a value added tax assessment notice, where the competent authority adopts a decision based on new elements of fact and of law in respect of which the person concerned has been unable to state its position, the decision adopted at the end of that procedure must be annulled if, had it not been for that irregularity, the outcome of that procedure might have been different, even though, at the request of the person concerned, enforcement of that tax assessment notice has been suspended in parallel with the legal proceedings brought against that decision.






(1)  
            OJ C 94, 13.3.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4559/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)