CELEX: 62012CA0494
Language: en
Date: 2013-11-21 00:00:00
Title: Case C-494/12: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 21 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Dixons Retail plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Directive 2006/112/EC — Value added tax — Supply of goods — Concept — Fraudulent use of a bank card)

8.2.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 39/7
            
         Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 21 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Dixons Retail plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
   (Case C-494/12) (1)
   
   (Directive 2006/112/EC - Value added tax - Supply of goods - Concept - Fraudulent use of a bank card)
   2014/C 39/11
   Language of the case: English
   
      Referring court
   
   First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant: Dixons Retail plc
   
      Respondents: Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
   
      Re:
   
   Request for a preliminary ruling — First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — Interpretation of Articles 14(1) and 73 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Concept of ‘supply of goods’ — Supply following a purchase made by means of the unauthorised and fraudulent use of a credit card
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Articles 2(1), 5(1) and 11A(1)(a) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment and Articles 2(1)(a), 14(1) and 73 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, the physical transfer of goods to a purchaser who fraudulently uses a bank card as a means of payment constitutes a ‘supply of goods’ within the meaning of Articles 2(1) and 5(1) of Directive 77/388 and Articles 2(1)(a) and 14(1) of Directive 2006/112 and that, in the context of such a transfer, the payment made by a third party, under an agreement concluded between it and the supplier of those goods by which the third party has undertaken to pay the supplier for the goods sold by the latter to purchasers using such a card as a means of payment, constitutes ‘consideration’ within the meaning of Article 11A(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 and Article 73 of Directive 2006/112.
   
      (1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.