mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Contudo, no que diz respeito à segunda declaração de IVA, o Serviço de Finanças A recusou, por aviso de liquidação de 4 de outubro de 2012, que o regime das pequenas empresas fosse aplicado a B relativamente ao exercício de 2010. Com efeito, a prática administrativa tinha sido alterada pela Umsatzsteuer‑Anwendungserlass (Circular sobre a aplicação do imposto sobre o volume de negócios), de 1 de outubro de 2010 (BStBl. 2010 I, p. 846), nos termos da qual, para aplicação do regime das pequenas empresas, especialmente nos casos em que se aplica o regime da margem de lucro aos revendedores, o volume de negócios anual devia ser calculado em função dos montantes recebidos e não em função do regime da margem de lucro.
Após indeferimento da reclamação apresentada contra esse aviso de liquidação, B interpôs recurso para o Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha) competente, que anulou o referido aviso de liquidação por considerar que os montantes recebidos que ultrapassassem a margem de lucro não devem ser considerados para o cálculo do volume de negócios, para efeitos de aplicação do regime especial das pequenas empresas.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Serviço de Finanças A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "a prática administrativa pela Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (1 de outubro de 2010 01/10/2010"[shape=trapezium];

  "B"->"Serviço de Finanças A"[label="à segunda declaração de IVA"];
  "Serviço de Finanças A"->"aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012";
  "aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012"->"recusou, por aviso de liquidação de 4 de outubro de 2012, que o regime das pequenas empresas fosse aplicado a B relativamente ao exercício de 2010."[dir=none];
  "recusou, por aviso de liquidação de 4 de outubro de 2012, que o regime das pequenas empresas fosse aplicado a B relativamente ao exercício de 2010."->"a prática administrativa pela Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (1 de outubro de 2010 01/10/2010"[dir=none];
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha)"[label="interpôs recurso"];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha)"->"anulou o referido aviso de liquidação";
  "anulou o referido aviso de liquidação"->"aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012";
  "anulou o referido aviso de liquidação"->"os montantes recebidos que ultrapassassem a margem de lucro não devem ser considerados."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Pokiaľ však ide o druhé daňové priznanie k DPH daňový úrad A v daňovom výmere zo 4. októbra 2012 zamietol uplatniť na B úpravu pre malé podniky za zdaniteľné obdobie 2010. Správna prax bola totiž zmenená prostredníctvom Umsatzsteuer‑Anwendungserlass (Pokyny na uplatňovanie dane z obratu) z 1. októbra 2010 (BStBl. 2010 I, s. 846), podľa ktorých sa na účely uplatňovania úpravy pre malé podniky, najmä v prípade uplatnenia úpravy zdaňovania prirážky na ďalších predajcov, mal ročný obrat vypočítať na základe tržieb, a nie na základe ziskovej prirážky.
Keďže sťažnosť podaná proti tomuto daňovému výmeru bola zamietnutá, B podal žalobu na príslušný Finanzgericht (Finančný súd, Nemecko), ktorý zrušil uvedený daňový výmer z dôvodu, že tržby presahujúce ziskovú prirážku by sa nemali zohľadniť pri výpočte obratu na účely uplatnenia osobitnej úpravy pre malé podniky.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "daňový úrad A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Finančný súd, Nemecko))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Správna prax Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (Umsatzsteuer‑Anwendungserlass (Pokyny na uplatňovanie dane z obratu) z 1. októbra 2010 01/10/2010"[shape=trapezium];

  "B"->"daňový úrad A"[label="druhé daňové priznanie k DPH"];
  "daňový úrad A"->"daňový výmer 04/10/2012";
  "daňový výmer 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "daňový výmer 04/10/2012"->"zamietol uplatniť na B úpravu pre malé podniky za zdaniteľné obdobie 2010"[dir=none];
  "zamietol uplatniť na B úpravu pre malé podniky za zdaniteľné obdobie 2010"->"Správna prax Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (Umsatzsteuer‑Anwendungserlass (Pokyny na uplatňovanie dane z obratu) z 1. októbra 2010 01/10/2010"[dir=none];
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Finančný súd, Nemecko))"[label="podal žalobu"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Finančný súd, Nemecko))"->"zrušil uvedený daňový výmer";
  "zrušil uvedený daňový výmer"->"daňový výmer 04/10/2012";
  "zrušil uvedený daňový výmer"->"tržby presahujúce ziskovú prirážku by sa nemali zohľadniť."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

Vendar je glede drugega obračuna DDV davčni urad A v odmerni odločbi z dne 4. oktobra 2012 zavrnil uporabo ureditve za mala podjetja za leto 2010 za B. Upravna praksa je bila namreč spremenjena z Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (navodila za uporabo davka na dodano vrednost) z dne 1. oktobra 2010 (BStBl. 2010 I, str. 846), v skladu s katerim mora biti za uporabo ureditve za mala podjetja, zlasti v primeru uporabe maržne ureditve za preprodajalce, letni promet izračunan glede na prejeta plačila, in ne na podlagi razlik v ceni.
Ker je bil ugovor zoper to odmerno odločbo zavrnjen, je B vložil tožbo pri pristojnem Finanzgericht (finančno sodišče, Nemčija), ki je navedeno odmerno odločbo odpravilo, ker se prejeta plačila, ki presegajo razlike v ceni, ne bi smela upoštevati pri izračunu prometa za namene uporabe posebne ureditve za mala podjetja.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "davčni urad A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (finančno sodišče, Nemčija))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Upravna praksa Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass 01/10/2010"[shape=trapezium];

  "B"->"davčni urad A"[label="drugega obračuna DDV"];
  "davčni urad A"->"odmerna odločba 04/10/2012";
  "odmerna odločba 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "odmerna odločba 04/10/2012"->"zavrnil uporabo ureditve za mala podjetja za leto 2010 za B"[dir=none];
  "zavrnil uporabo ureditve za mala podjetja za leto 2010 za B"->"Upravna praksa Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass 01/10/2010"[dir=none];
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (finančno sodišče, Nemčija))"[label="je B vložil tožbo"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (finančno sodišče, Nemčija))"->"odpravilo navedeno odmerno odločbo";
  "odpravilo navedeno odmerno odločbo"->"odmerna odločba 04/10/2012";
  "odpravilo navedeno odmerno odločbo"->"prejeta plačila, ki presegajo razlike v ceni, ne bi smela upoštevati."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Finnish

Toisen arvonlisäveroilmoituksen osalta A:n verotoimisto kuitenkin kieltäytyi 4.10.2012 päivätyssä verotuspäätöksessään soveltamasta B:hen pienten yritysten järjestelmää verovuodelta 2010. Verohallinnon noudattamaa käytäntöä oli nimittäin muutettu 1.10.2010 annetulla liikevaihtoveroa koskevalla soveltamisohjeella (Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass, BStBl. 2010 I, s. 846), joiden mukaan pienten yritysten erityisjärjestelmän soveltamiseksi muun muassa jälleenmyyjien voittomarginaalijärjestelmää koskevissa tapauksissa vuotuinen liikevaihto oli laskettava saatujen vastikkeiden perusteella eikä voittomarginaalin perusteella.
Sen jälkeen, kun tästä verotuspäätöksestä tehty oikaisuvaatimus oli hylätty, B nosti kanteen toimivaltaisessa Finanzgerichtissä (verotuomioistuin, Saksa), joka kumosi mainitun verotuspäätöksen sillä perusteella, että saadut vastikkeet, jotka ylittivät voittomarginaalin, on jätettävä huomiotta pienten yritysten erityisjärjestelmän soveltamisessa.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "A:n verotoimisto A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgerichtissä (verotuomioistuin, Saksa))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Verohallinnon noudattamaa käytäntöä Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (1.10.2010 annetulla liikevaihtoveroa koskevalla soveltamisohjeella 01/10/2010"[shape=trapezium];

  "B"->"A:n verotoimisto A"[label="Toisen arvonlisäveroilmoituksen"];
  "A:n verotoimisto A"->"arvonlisäveroilmoituksen 04/10/2012";
  "arvonlisäveroilmoituksen 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "arvonlisäveroilmoituksen 04/10/2012"->"kieltäytyi soveltamasta B:hen pienten yritysten järjestelmää verovuodelta 2010."[dir=none];
  "kieltäytyi soveltamasta B:hen pienten yritysten järjestelmää verovuodelta 2010."->"Verohallinnon noudattamaa käytäntöä Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (1.10.2010 annetulla liikevaihtoveroa koskevalla soveltamisohjeella 01/10/2010"[dir=none];
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgerichtissä (verotuomioistuin, Saksa))"[label="B nosti kanteen"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgerichtissä (verotuomioistuin, Saksa))"->"kumosi mainitun verotuspäätöksen";
  "kumosi mainitun verotuspäätöksen"->"arvonlisäveroilmoituksen 04/10/2012";
  "kumosi mainitun verotuspäätöksen"->"Saadut vastikkeet, jotka ylittivät voittomarginaalin, on jätettävä huomiotta."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Swedish

När det gäller den andra mervärdesskattedeklarationen ansåg dock skattemyndigheten A, i ett beskattningsbeslut av den 4 oktober 2012, att ordningen för små företag inte skulle tillämpas på B för år 2010. Den administrativa praxisen hade nämligen ändrats genom Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (tillämpningsföreskrifter avseende mervärdesskatt) av den 1 oktober 2010 (BStBl. 2010 I, s. 846), enligt vilken den årliga omsättningen vid tillämpningen av den särskilda ordningen för små företag, bland annat i de fall ordningen för beskattning av vinstmarginal tillämpas på återförsäljare, ska beräknas på grundval av inbetalningar och inte på grundval av vinstmarginalen.
Efter att begäran om omprövning av detta skattebeslut avslagits, överklagade B till den behöriga Finanzgericht (Skattedomstolen, Tyskland) som ogiltigförklarade skattebeslutet med motiveringen att inbetalningar som överstiger vinstmarginalen inte ska beaktas vid beräkningen av omsättningen vid tillämpningen av den särskilda ordningen för små företag.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "skattemyndigheten A A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Skattedomstolen, Tyskland))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Den administrativa praxisen Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (tillämpningsföreskrifter avseende mervärdesskatt) av 01/10/2010"[shape=trapezium];

  "B"->"skattemyndigheten A A"[label="den andra mervärdesskattedeklarationen"];
  "skattemyndigheten A A"->"skattebeslut 04/10/2012";
  "skattebeslut 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "skattebeslut 04/10/2012"->"inte skulle tillämpas på B för år 2010"[dir=none];
  "inte skulle tillämpas på B för år 2010"->"Den administrativa praxisen Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (Umsatzsteuer-Anwendungserlass (tillämpningsföreskrifter avseende mervärdesskatt) av 01/10/2010"[dir=none];
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Skattedomstolen, Tyskland))"[label="överklagade B"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Skattedomstolen, Tyskland))"->"ogiltigförklarade skattebeslutet";
  "ogiltigförklarade skattebeslutet"->"skattebeslut 04/10/2012";
  "ogiltigförklarade skattebeslutet"->"inbetalningar som överstiger vinstmarginalen inte ska beaktas."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: English

An objection to that tax notice having been rejected, B brought an action before the competent Finanzgericht (Finance Court, Germany), which annulled the tax notice on the ground that, for the purposes of determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises applied, amounts received in excess of the profit margin were not to be taken into account.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Tax Office A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Finanzgericht (Finance Court, Germany)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
   "Tax Office A"->"Tax notice 04/10/2012";
   "Tax notice 04/10/2012"->"B";
   "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finance Court, Germany)"[label="Brought an action"];
   "Finanzgericht (Finance Court, Germany)"->"Annulled the tax notice";
   "Annulled the tax notice"->"Tax notice 04/10/2012";
   "Annulled the tax notice"->"Amounts received in excess of the profit margin were not to be taken into account."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Bulgarian

В подава жалба по административен ред срещу акта за установяване на размера на дължимия данък, а след отхвърлянето ѝ подава жалба пред компетентния Finanzgericht (Финансов съд, Германия), който отменя акта с мотива, че получените суми над маржа на печалба не следва да се вземат предвид при изчисляването на оборота за целите на прилагането на специалния режим за малки предприятия.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Данъчна служба A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Финансов съд, Германия)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Данъчна служба A"->"акта за установяване на размера на дължимия данък 04/10/2012";
  "акта за установяване на размера на дължимия данък 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Финансов съд, Германия)"[label="подава жалба"];
  "Finanzgericht (Финансов съд, Германия)"->"отменя акта";
  "отменя акта"->"акта за установяване на размера на дължимия данък 04/10/2012";
  "отменя акта"->"получените суми над маржа на печалба не следва да се вземат предвид."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Spanish

Dado que la reclamación presentada contra dicha liquidación fue desestimada, B interpuso un recurso ante el Finanzgericht (Tribunal de lo Tributario, Alemania) competente, que anuló la citada liquidación, debido a que, a efectos de la aplicación del régimen especial de las pequeñas empresas, los cobros que excedían del margen de beneficio no debían tenerse en cuenta para calcular el volumen de negocios.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunal de lo Tributario A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunal de lo Tributario, Alemania)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Tribunal de lo Tributario A"->"dicha liquidación 04/10/2012";
  "dicha liquidación 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Tribunal de lo Tributario, Alemania)"[label="interpuso un recurso"];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunal de lo Tributario, Alemania)"->"anuló la citada liquidación";
  "anuló la citada liquidación"->"dicha liquidación 04/10/2012";
  "anuló la citada liquidación"->"los cobros que excedían del margen de beneficio no debían tenerse en cuenta."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Czech

Vzhledem k tomu, že stížnost podaná proti tomuto daňovému výměru byla zamítnuta, B podal žalobu k příslušnému Finanzgericht (finanční soud, Německo), který uvedený daňový výměr zrušil z důvodu, že přijaté úhrady převyšující ziskovou přirážku nemají být zohledněny při výpočtu obratu pro účely použití zvláštního režimu pro malé podniky.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (finanční soud, Německo))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Finanzgericht A"->"daňovému výměru 04/10/2012";
  "daňovému výměru 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (finanční soud, Německo))"[label="podal žalobu"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (finanční soud, Německo))"->"zrušil uvedený daňový výměr";
  "zrušil uvedený daňový výměr"->"daňovému výměru 04/10/2012";
  "zrušil uvedený daňový výměr"->"přijaté úhrady převyšující ziskovou přirážku nemají být zohledněny."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Danish

Idet B ikke fik medhold i sin klage over denne afgiftsansættelse, anlagde B sag ved den kompetente Finanzgericht (domstol i skatte- og afgiftsretlige sager, Tyskland), som annullerede nævnte afgiftsansættelse med den begrundelse, at de modtagne beløb, der overstiger fortjenstmargenen, ikke skal tages i betragtning ved beregningen af omsætningen med henblik på anvendelsen af særordningen for små virksomheder.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (domstol i skatte- og afgiftsretlige sager, Tyskland))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Finanzgericht A"->"afgiftsansættelse 04/10/2012";
  "afgiftsansættelse 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (domstol i skatte- og afgiftsretlige sager, Tyskland))"[label="anlagde B sag"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (domstol i skatte- og afgiftsretlige sager, Tyskland))"->"annullerede nævnte afgiftsansættelse";
  "annullerede nævnte afgiftsansættelse"->"afgiftsansættelse 04/10/2012";
  "annullerede nævnte afgiftsansættelse"->"de modtagne beløb, der overstiger fortjenstmargenen, ikke skal tages i betragtning."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: German

Nachdem der gegen diesen Steuerbescheid eingelegte Einspruch zurückgewiesen worden war, erhob B Klage beim zuständigen Finanzgericht (Deutschland), das den Steuerbescheid mit der Begründung aufhob, die vereinnahmten Entgelte, die über die Handelsspanne hinausgingen, seien bei der Ermittlung des Umsatzes für die Anwendung der Sonderregelung für Kleinunternehmen unberücksichtigt zu lassen.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Deutschland))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Finanzgericht A"->"Steuerbescheid 04/10/2012";
  "Steuerbescheid 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Deutschland))"[label="erhob B Klage"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Deutschland))"->"das den Steuerbescheid mit der Begründung aufhob";
  "das den Steuerbescheid mit der Begründung aufhob"->"Steuerbescheid 04/10/2012";
  "das den Steuerbescheid mit der Begründung aufhob"->"die vereinnahmten Entgelte, die über die Handelsspanne hinausgingen, seien bei der Ermittlung des Umsatzes für die Anwendung der Sonderregelung für Kleinunternehmen unberücksichtigt zu lassen.."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Estonian

Selle maksuteate peale esitatud vaie jäeti rahuldamata ja B esitas kaebuse pädevale Finanzgerichtile (maksukohus, Saksamaa), mis tühistas maksuteate põhjendusel, et kasuminormi ületanud laekunud makseid ei võeta arvesse käibe arvutamisel väikeettevõtjate korra kohaldamiseks.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "maksukohus A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgerichtile (maksukohus, Saksamaa))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "maksukohus A"->"maksuteate 04/10/2012";
  "maksuteate 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgerichtile (maksukohus, Saksamaa))"[label="esitas kaebuse"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgerichtile (maksukohus, Saksamaa))"->"tühistas maksuteate";
  "tühistas maksuteate"->"maksuteate 04/10/2012";
  "tühistas maksuteate"->"kasuminormi ületanud laekunud makseid ei võteta arvesse."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Greek

Μετά την απόρριψη της διοικητικής ενστάσεώς του κατά του εν λόγω εκκαθαριστικού σημειώματος, ο Β άσκησε προσφυγή ενώπιον του αρμόδιου Finanzgericht (φορολογικού δικαστηρίου, Γερμανία), το οποίο ακύρωσε το εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα, με το σκεπτικό ότι οι εισπράξεις που υπερέβαιναν το περιθώριο κέρδους δεν έπρεπε να ληφθούν υπόψη για τον υπολογισμό του κύκλου εργασιών, για τους σκοπούς της εφαρμογής του ειδικού καθεστώτος μικρών επιχειρήσεων.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "φορολογικού δικαστηρίου A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (φορολογικού δικαστηρίου, Γερμανία)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "φορολογικού δικαστηρίου A"->"εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα 04/10/2012";
  "εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (φορολογικού δικαστηρίου, Γερμανία)"[label="άσκησε προσφυγή"];
  "Finanzgericht (φορολογικού δικαστηρίου, Γερμανία)"->"ακύρωσε το εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα";
  "ακύρωσε το εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα"->"εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα 04/10/2012";
  "ακύρωσε το εκκαθαριστικό σημείωμα"->"οι εισπράξεις που υπερέβαιναν το περιθώριο κέρδους δεν έπρεπε να ληφθούν υπόψη."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: French

La réclamation formée contre cet avis d’imposition ayant été rejetée, B a introduit un recours devant le Finanzgericht (tribunal des finances, Allemagne) compétent, qui a annulé ledit avis d’imposition, au motif que les encaissements allant au-delà de la marge bénéficiaire ne devraient pas être pris en compte pour le calcul du chiffre d’affaires, aux fins de l’application du régime particulier des petites entreprises.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "avis d’imposition A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (tribunal des finances, Allemagne))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "avis d’imposition A"->"avis d’imposition 04/10/2012";
  "avis d’imposition 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (tribunal des finances, Allemagne))"[label="a introduit un recours"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (tribunal des finances, Allemagne))"->"a annulé ledit avis d’imposition";
  "a annulé ledit avis d’imposition"->"avis d’imposition 04/10/2012";
  "a annulé ledit avis d’imposition"->"les encaissments allant au-delà de la marge bénéficiaire ne devraient pas être pris en compte."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Croatian

Budući da je prigovor koji je bio podnesen protiv tog poreznog rješenja odbijen, osoba B podnijela je tužbu nadležnom Finanzgerichtu (Financijski sud, Njemačka) koji je poništio navedeno porezno rješenje s obrazloženjem da se naplaćene naknade koje premašuju iznos razlike u cijeni ne uzimaju u obzir za izračun prometa u svrhu primjene posebnih odredbi za mala poduzeća.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Porezni ured A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (porezno rješenje)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Porezni ured A"->"04/10/2012";
  "04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (porezno rješenje)"[label="poništio navedeno porezno rješenje"];
  "Finanzgericht (porezno rješenje)"->"Naplaćene naknade koje premašuju iznos razlike u cijeni ne uzimaju u obzir";
  "Naplaćene naknade koje premašuju iznos razlike u cijeni ne uzimaju u obzir"->"04/10/2012";
  "Naplaćene naknade koje premašuju iznos razlike u cijeni ne uzimaju u obzir"->"Financijski sud, Njemačka."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Italian

Poiché il reclamo proposto contro tale avviso d’accertamento gli veniva respinto, B ha presentato ricorso dinanzi al competente Finanzgericht (Tribunale tributario, Germania), che ha annullato l’avviso di accertamento impugnato considerando che gli incassi eccedenti il margine di profitto non dovessero essere tenuti in conto per il calcolo del volume d’affari ai fini dell’applicazione del regime speciale delle piccole imprese.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunale tributario A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Tribunale tributario, Germania))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Tribunale tributario A"->"avviso d’accertamento 04/10/2012";
  "avviso d’accertamento 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Tribunale tributario, Germania))"[label="ha presentato ricorso"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Tribunale tributario, Germania))"->"ha annullato l’avviso di accertamento impugnato";
  "ha annullato l’avviso di accertamento impugnato"->"avviso d’accertamento 04/10/2012";
  "ha annullato l’avviso di accertamento impugnato"->"gli incassi eccedenti il margine di profitto non dovessero essere tenuti in conto."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Latvian

Tā kā sūdzība par šo paziņojumu par nodokli tika noraidīta, B cēla prasību kompetentajā Finanzgericht (Finanšu tiesa, Vācija), kura atcēla minēto paziņojumu par nodokli, pamatojoties uz to, ka iekasētās summas, kuras pārsniedz peļņas daļu, neesot jāņem vērā apgrozījuma aprēķinā īpašā režīma mazajiem uzņēmumiem piemērošanas vajadzībām.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Finanšu tiesa, Vācija))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Finanzgericht A"->"paziņojumu par nodokli 04/10/2012";
  "paziņojumu par nodokli 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Finanšu tiesa, Vācija))"[label="cēla prasību"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (Finanšu tiesa, Vācija))"->"atcēla minēto paziņojumu par nodokli";
  "atcēla minēto paziņojumu par nodokli"->"paziņojumu par nodokli 04/10/2012";
  "atcēla minēto paziņojumu par nodokli"->"iekasētās summas, kuras pārsniedz peļņas daļu, neesot jāņem vērā."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Lithuanian

Kadangi skundas dėl šio pranešimo dėl mokesčių buvo atmestas, B pareiškė ieškinį Finanzgericht (Finansų teismas), o šis teismas panaikino minėtą pranešimą dėl mokesčių dėl to, kad apskaičiuojant apyvartą neturėtų būti atsižvelgiama į gautas pajamas, viršijančias maržą, taikant specialią smulkiojo verslo įmonėms skirtą schemą.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finansų teismas A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Finansų teismas A"->"pranešimą dėl mokesčių 04/10/2012";
  "pranešimą dėl mokesčių 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht)"[label="pareiškė ieškinį"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht)"->"panaikino minėtą pranešimą dėl mokesčių";
  "panaikino minėtą pranešimą dėl mokesčių"->"pranešimą dėl mokesčių 04/10/2012";
  "panaikino minėtą pranešimą dėl mokesčių"->"gautas pajamas, viršijančias maržą, neturėtų būti atsižvelgiama."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

Mivel az ezen adóhatározattal szemben benyújtott panaszt elutasították, B keresetet indított az illetékes Finanzgericht (pénzügyi bíróság, Németország) előtt, amely azzal az indokkal helyezte hatályon kívül az említett adóhatározatot, hogy az árrést meghaladó kapott ellenértékeket nem kell figyelembe venni az árbevétel kiszámításához a kisvállalkozásokra vonatkozó különös szabályozás alkalmazása céljából.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Adóhivatal A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (pénzügyi bíróság, Németország))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Adóhivatal A"->"adóhatározat 04/10/2012";
  "adóhatározat 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (pénzügyi bíróság, Németország))"[label="keresetet indított"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (pénzügyi bíróság, Németország))"->"helyezte hatályon kívül az említett adóhatározatot";
  "helyezte hatályon kívül az említett adóhatározatot"->"adóhatározat 04/10/2012";
  "helyezte hatályon kívül az említett adóhatározatot"->"az árrést meghaladó kapott ellenértékeket nem kell figyelembe venni."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Maltese

Peress li l-ilment kontra dan l-avviż ta’ tassazzjoni ġie miċħud, B ressaq azzjoni quddiem il-Finanzgericht (il-Qorti tal-Finanzi, il-Ġermanja) kompetenti, li annullat l-imsemmi avviż ta’ tassazzjoni għar-raġuni li l-ammonti ta’ flus irċevuti li jmorru lil hinn mill-marġni ta’ profitt ma għandhomx jitqiesu għall-kalkolu tad-dħul mill-bejgħ, għall-finijiet tal-applikazzjoni tal-iskema speċjali għall-impriżi żgħar.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "il-Finanzgericht A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (il-Finanzgericht (il-Qorti tal-Finanzi, il-Ġermanja))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "il-Finanzgericht A"->"avviż ta’ tassazzjoni 04/10/2012";
  "avviż ta’ tassazzjoni 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (il-Finanzgericht (il-Qorti tal-Finanzi, il-Ġermanja))"[label="ressaq azzjoni"];
  "Finanzgericht (il-Finanzgericht (il-Qorti tal-Finanzi, il-Ġermanja))"->"li annullat l-imsemmi avviż ta’ tassazzjoni";
  "li annullat l-imsemmi avviż ta’ tassazzjoni"->"avviż ta’ tassazzjoni 04/10/2012";
  "li annullat l-imsemmi avviż ta’ tassazzjoni"->"l-ammonti ta’ flus irċevuti li jmorru lil hinn mill-marġni ta’ profitt ma għandhomx jitqiesu għall-kalkolu."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Dutch

Nadat het tegen deze belastingaanslag gemaakte bezwaar was afgewezen, heeft B beroep ingesteld bij het bevoegde Finanzgericht (belastingrechter in eerste aanleg, Duitsland), dat die belastingaanslag heeft vernietigd op grond dat de ontvangen betalingen die de winstmarge overschrijden, niet in aanmerking mogen worden genomen voor de berekening van de omzet met het oog op de toepassing van de bijzondere regeling voor kleine ondernemingen.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (belastingrechter in eerste aanleg, Duitsland))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Finanzgericht A"->"belastingaanslag 04/10/2012";
  "belastingaanslag 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (belastingrechter in eerste aanleg, Duitsland))"[label="beroeep ingesteld"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (belastingrechter in eerste aanleg, Duitsland))"->"die belastingaanslag heeft vernietigd";
  "die belastingaanslag heeft vernietigd"->"belastingaanslag 04/10/2012";
  "die belastingaanslag heeft vernietigd"->"De ontvangen betalingen die de winstmarge overschrijden, niet in aanmerking mogen worden genomen."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Polish

Ponieważ odwołanie od tej decyzji podatkowej zostało oddalone, B wniósł skargę do właściwego Finanzgericht (sądu finansowego, Niemcy), który uchylił rzeczoną decyzję podatkową na tej podstawie, że do celów ustalenia obrotu w celu zastosowania szczególnej procedury dla małych przedsiębiorstw nie należy brać pod uwagę wynagrodzeń wykraczających poza marżę.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Urząd Skarbowy A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (sądu finansowego, Niemcy))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Urząd Skarbowy A"->"Decyzji podatkowej 04/10/2012";
  "Decyzji podatkowej 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (sądu finansowego, Niemcy))"[label="wniósł skargę"];
  "Finanzgericht (Finanzgericht (sądu finansowego, Niemcy))"->"uchylił rzeczoną decyzję podatkową";
  "uchylił rzeczoną decyzję podatkową"->"Decyzji podatkowej 04/10/2012";
  "uchylił rzeczoną decyzję podatkową"->"wynagrodzeń wykraczających poza marżę nie należy brać pod uwagę."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Após indeferimento da reclamação apresentada contra esse aviso de liquidação, B interpôs recurso para o Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha) competente, que anulou o referido aviso de liquidação por considerar que os montantes recebidos que ultrapassassem a margem de lucro não devem ser considerados para o cálculo do volume de negócios, para efeitos de aplicação do regime especial das pequenas empresas.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunal Tributário A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Tribunal Tributário A"->"aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012";
  "aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha)"[label="interpôs recurso"];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunal Tributário, Alemanha)"->"anulou o referido aviso de liquidação";
  "anulou o referido aviso de liquidação"->"aviso de liquidação 04/10/2012";
  "anulou o referido aviso de liquidação"->"os montantes recebidos que ultrapassassem a margem de lucro não devem ser considerados."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Finanzamt A v B.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Point 1 of the first paragraph of Article 288 and Article 315 — Special scheme for small enterprises — Special arrangements for taxable dealers — Taxable dealer falling under the margin scheme — Annual turnover determining whether the special scheme for small enterprises is applicable — Profit margin or amounts received.
Case C-388/18. (2019)
Language: Romanian

Întrucât reclamația formulată împotriva acestei decizii de impunere a fost respinsă, B a introdus o acțiune la Finanzgericht (Tribunalul Fiscal, Germania) competent, care a anulat decizia de impunere menționată, pentru motivul că încasările care depășesc marja de profit nu ar trebui luate în considerare pentru calcularea cifrei de afaceri, în scopul aplicării regimului special pentru întreprinderile mici.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "B"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunalul Fiscal A"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunalul Fiscal, Germania)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Tribunalul Fiscal A"->"decizia de impunere 04/10/2012";
  "decizia de impunere 04/10/2012"->"B";
  "B"->"Finanzgericht (Tribunalul Fiscal, Germania)"[label="a introdus o acțiune"];
  "Finanzgericht (Tribunalul Fiscal, Germania)"->"a anulat decizia de impunere";
  "a anulat decizia de impunere"->"decizia de impunere 04/10/2012";
  "a anulat decizia de impunere"->"încasările care depășesc marja de profit nu ar trebui luate în considerare."[dir=none];
}