CELEX: 62019CA0043
Language: en
Date: 2020-06-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-43/19: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 11 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Vodafone Portugal — Comunicações Pessoais SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 2(1)(c) — Scope — Taxable transactions — Services supplied for consideration — Monies paid where customers fail to comply with the contractual tie-in period — Characterisation)

17.8.2020   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 271/10
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 11 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Vodafone Portugal — Comunicações Pessoais SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
      (Case C-43/19) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 2(1)(c) - Scope - Taxable transactions - Services supplied for consideration - Monies paid where customers fail to comply with the contractual tie-in period - Characterisation)
      (2020/C 271/14)
      Language of the case: Portuguese
      
         Referring court
      
      Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: Vodafone Portugal — Comunicações Pessoais SA
      
         Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that amounts received by an economic operator in the event of early termination, for reasons specific to the customer, of a services contract requiring compliance with a tie-in period in exchange for granting that customer advantageous commercial conditions, must be considered to constitute the remuneration for a supply of services for consideration, within the meaning of that provision.
      
         (1)  OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.