Testimonials
"We have found taxback.com to be a very beneficial service partner in VAT compliance services. They provide a very professional and flexible service which has enabled us to tailor the service received to our specific requirements. They have proved themselves to be very knowledgeable and helpful and the training provided has helped enhance our in house expertise."
"Many thanks for the service provided to us. I found you at all times to be thorough and professional and communicated the process clearly and efficiently. We have retained your services again this year."
"Taxback.com has been very responsive in working together to develop a worldwide vat recovery service for us. We have been very impressed with their drive, understanding and timeliness in getting the right detail."
"We found working with taxback.com was a very positive experience for us as well as an enhancement to our VAT recovery process."
"We found taxback.com to be a very beneficial partner to work with in respect of VAT reclamation and also in the area of VAT compliance."
Our Partners
News Categories
Recent News
EU - Questions put to ECJ on adjustments to VAT invoices
Thursday, 08.03.2012
VAT News
EOOD Stroy Trans (C-642/11)
The Bulgarian court has referred the following questions for a preliminary ruling:
LVK-56 ЕООD (C-643/11)
The Bulgarian court referred the following questions:
The Bulgarian court has referred the following questions for a preliminary ruling:
-
"Must Article 203 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC ... be interpreted as meaning that VAT entered by a person on an invoice shall be payable regardless of whether there are grounds for entering it on the invoice (lack of a supply or of services or a payment), and as meaning that the authorities who review the application of the ... Law on VAT are not authorised to carry out adjustments to the tax entered on the invoice by a person in the light of a national provision pursuant to which an invoice may only be adjusted by its issuer?
Are the principles of fiscal neutrality, proportionality and of legitimate expectations infringed by a practice in the administration and in the courts, under which one party (the person named in the invoice as the buyer) is refused the right to deduct input VAT by means of a tax assessment notice, whilst in relation to the other party (the issuer of the invoice) no adjustment of the VAT entered on the invoice is carried out, again by means of a tax assessment notice, specifically in the following cases:
– the issuer of the invoice did not submit any documents for the purposes of the tax assessment conducted in relation to him;
– the issuer of the invoice submitted documents during the tax assessment procedure but his suppliers did not submit any evidence or on the basis of the evidence submitted it is not possible to establish that the goods or services were actually supplied;
– during the tax assessment procedure to which the issuer of the invoices was subjected, the supplies at issue in the chain were not reviewed?"
LVK-56 ЕООD (C-643/11)
The Bulgarian court referred the following questions:
-
"Does Article 203 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC ... cover all cases of incorrectly charged VAT, including cases in which an invoice showing VAT was issued without a chargeable event having occurred? If the answer to that question is in the affirmative, do Articles 203 and 273 require the Member States to lay down express rules to the effect that VAT shown on an invoice in respect of which no supply has taken place is payable, or is it sufficient for them to transpose the general rule in the Directive to the effect that that tax is payable by any person who enters it on an invoice?
In the light of recital 39 in the preamble to Directive 2006/112 and with a view to ensuring the accuracy of deductions, do Articles 73, 179 and 203 of Directive 2006/112 require that, where VAT is shown on an invoice without a chargeable event having occurred, the revenue authorities must correct the tax base and the tax charged?
Can the special measures provided for in Article 395 of Directive 2006/112 consist in a tax practice such as that in the main proceedings, whereby, for the purposes of verifying deductions, the revenue authorities check only the deduction made, while the tax on the output supplies is regarded as being necessarily payable solely because it was shown on an invoice? If that question is answered in the affirmative, is it permissible under Article 203 of Directive 2006/112 - and, if so, in what circumstances - for VAT on the same transaction to be collected once from the provider of the goods or services, because he entered the tax on an invoice, and a second time from the purchaser of the goods or recipient of the services, inasmuch as he is refused the right to deduct?
Is a tax practice such as that in the main proceedings - whereby the purchaser of taxable goods or the recipient of taxable services is refused the right to deduct on the ground that there is ‘no evidence that the supply took place’, without any account being taken of findings already made to the effect that a right to claim tax has accrued against the provider of the goods or services and that tax is payable by him, bearing in mind that, up to the point at which the accrual of the right to deduct was evaluated, the tax assessment notice in question had not been adjusted and no reason to adjust it in the manner prescribed by the State had emerged or been established - in breach of the non-cumulative nature of VAT and at odds with the principles of legal certainty, equal treatment and fiscal neutrality?
Is it permissible under Articles 167 and 168(a) of Directive 2006/112 for the purchaser of taxable goods or the recipient of taxable services who fulfils all the conditions laid down in Article 178 of the Directive to be refused the right to deduct after a tax assessment notice which was issued to the provider of the goods or services and has become final did not correct the VAT charged on that supply because ‘no chargeable event occurred’, but, rather, the right to claim tax was recognised as having accrued and was taken into consideration in determining the net tax due for the tax period in question? Is it relevant to the answer to that question that the provider of the goods or services did not submit any accounting documents during the tax assessment and that the net tax due for that period was determined solely by reference to the information given in the VAT declarations and in the sales and purchase books?
Depending on the answers to the above questions, are Articles 167 and 168(a) of Directive 2006/112 to be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, the neutrality of VAT requires that a taxable person must be able to deduct the tax charged on supplies made to him?"
News & Updates
