CELEX: 62018CA0446
Language: en
Date: 2020-05-14 00:00:00
Title: Case C-446/18: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — AGROBET CZ, s.r.o. v Finanční úřad pro Středočeský kraj (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Deduction of input VAT — Excess VAT — Retention of the excess following the initiation of a tax inspection procedure — Request for a refund of the excess part relating to transactions not covered by that procedure)

20.7.2020   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 240/3
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — AGROBET CZ, s.r.o. v Finanční úřad pro Středočeský kraj
      (Case C-446/18) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Deduction of input VAT - Excess VAT - Retention of the excess following the initiation of a tax inspection procedure - Request for a refund of the excess part relating to transactions not covered by that procedure)
      (2020/C 240/03)
      Language of the case: Czech
      
         Referring court
      
      Nejvyšší správní soud
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: AGROBET CZ, s.r.o.
      
         Defendant: Finanční úřad pro Středočeský kraj
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Articles 179, 183 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in the light of the principle of fiscal neutrality, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which does not allow the tax authority, before the end of a tax inspection procedure relating to a value added tax (VAT) return showing an excess for a given tax period, to refund that part of the excess relating to transactions which are not covered by that procedure at the time it was initiated, provided that it is not possible to establish in a clear, precise and unequivocal manner that a VAT excess, the amount of which may potentially be lower than the amount relating to the transactions not covered by that procedure, will exist regardless of the outcome of that procedure, which is a matter for the referring court to ascertain.
      
         (1)  OJ C 328, 17.9.2018.