Case C-466/25, Szilvási Trader: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 15 July 2025 – Szilvási Trader Korlátolt Felelősségű Társaság v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
Date: 2025-07-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, principle of legal certainty, right to an effective remedy, right to justice, tax authorities, tax collection, tax law, taxpayer








C_202505811EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5811


10.11.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 15 July 2025 – Szilvási Trader Korlátolt Felelősségű Társaság v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága


(Case C-466/25, Szilvási Trader)

(C/2025/5811)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Szilvási Trader Korlátolt Felelősségű Társaság

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

Questions referred







1.


Must the principles – forming an integral part of EU law – of the right to good administration, enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), and of the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter, and the principle of legal certainty set out in the preamble to the EU Treaty, be interpreted as not precluding national legislative provisions – namely those of Article 127(5)(b) and Article 127(6) of the az adóigazgatási rendtartásról szóló 2017. évi CLI. törvény (Law No CLI of 2017 organising the tax administration; ‘the Law on tax procedure’) – and the national practice for interpreting and applying those provisions, under which, where the second-tier tax authority decides to adopt provisions itself in order to supplement the establishment of the facts and, in that context, orders the first-tier tax authority to carry out – without deciding on the substance – the necessary procedure, that tax authority requests the taxable person to declare whether he or she wishes to supplement his or her complaint and sets a time limit of five working days within which to do so, although neither the Law on tax procedure nor any other provision governing tax procedure recognises or regulates the concept of a ‘supplementary complaint’, the Law on tax procedure does not lay down the time limit for submitting such a supplementary complaint and the time limit of five working days within which to submit that supplementary complaint has been set by the first-tier tax authority of its own volition and in a discretionary manner?










2.


Must the principles – forming an integral part of EU law – of the right to good administration, enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter, and of the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter, and the principle of legal certainty set out in the preamble to the EU Treaty be interpreted as not precluding a system in which Article 127(5)(b) and Article 127(6) of the Law on tax procedure make no provision for communicating to the taxable person the interim decision of the second-tier tax authority ordering that the establishment of the facts must be supplemented; in which that law contains no further provisions determining what rights and powers are enjoyed by the taxable person in the context of the supplementary establishment of the facts, and according to what procedure and within what time limit that person may exercise those rights; and in which that law also fails to specify the details of the powers and obligations of the tax authorities?










3.


Must the principles – forming an integral part of EU law – of the right to good administration, enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter, and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter, and the rights of defence of the taxable person and the principle of equality of arms, be interpreted as not precluding national legislation and practice under which the tax administration grants the taxable person a time limit of only five working days within which to submit (by means of a ‘supplementary complaint’) observations in the context of the procedure for supplementing the establishment of the facts, when, according to Article 127(6) of the Law on tax procedure, the time limit for the procedure of supplementing the establishment of the facts is 90 days, with the length of that procedure not being taken into account in the time limit of 60 days for conducting the appeal procedure?






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5811/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)