Case C-465/25, Matin Maier: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Alba (Romania) lodged on 17 June 2025 – Matin Maier SRL v Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Alba, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Brașov
Date: 2025-06-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, principle of legal certainty, right to justice, rights of the defence, tax authorities, tax collection, tax evasion, tax law, tax relief, taxpayer








C_202505672EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5672


3.11.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Alba (Romania) lodged on 17 June 2025 – Matin Maier SRL v Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Alba, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Brașov


(Case C-465/25, Matin Maier)

(C/2025/5672)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Alba

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Matin Maier SRL

Defendants: Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Alba, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Brașov

Questions referred







1.


Do the general principle of respect for the rights of the defence, enshrined in Article 48(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as defined at Union level, and the right to good administration, as set out in Article 41(2)(b) of the Charter, preclude a national practice, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, whereby access to the administrative file is denied to a taxpayer at the administrative stage of tax proceedings on the ground that the tax inspection authority claims that some of the documents contained in that file were not taken into account when determining the tax situation?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, do the provisions of Articles 41, 47, 48 and 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as the principles of respect for the rights of the defence and the right to a fair trial, preclude a practice of the tax administration and the courts whereby fiscal administrative acts that are detrimental to the individual are not annulled where the condition that the outcome of the administrative procedure may have been different has been satisfied?










3.


Does Article 52(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 8(2) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, preclude the use, in administrative tax proceedings, of the results of secret information gathering in the context of actions pursued without any connection with the proceedings, where the taxpayer has not been made aware of such evidence?










4.


Do the provisions of Articles 178, 213 and 214 of the VAT Directive (1) and the principle of fiscal neutrality preclude national rules by which a Member State requires a citizen to collect VAT and pay it to the State, without, however, granting that citizen a corresponding right to deduct VAT, on the ground that a trading partner’s VAT number has been revoked, even though that partner has fulfilled its payment obligations to the Treasury?










5.


In the light of the circumstances of the main proceedings, should the principles of legal certainty, protection of legitimate expectations, proportionality and loyal cooperation, as they result from the VAT Directive, be interpreted as prohibiting the imposition of an obligation to collect and pay VAT on the taxpayer without granting that taxpayer the right to deduct VAT, until it is established that there has been tax evasion on the part of the taxpayer, in accordance with Article 273 of the VAT Directive?






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5672/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)