12.11.2018
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 408/14
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bucureşti — Romania) — Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy România SRL, formerly Gamesa Wind România SRL v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili
(Case C-69/17) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Right of deduction - Acquisitions made by a taxpayer declared ‘inactive’ by the tax authorities - Refusal of the right of deduction - Principles of proportionality and neutrality of VAT))
(2018/C 408/15)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Curtea de Apel Bucureşti
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy România SRL, formerly Gamesa Wind România SRL
Respondents: Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor, Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili
Operative part of the judgment
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, in particular Articles 213, 214 and 273 thereof, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which it is permissible for the tax authorities to refuse, on account of a failure to submit tax returns, a taxable person which has made acquisitions in the period during which its value added tax identification number was revoked the right to deduct value added tax on those acquisitions using value added tax returns filed — or invoices issued — after the reactivation of its identification number, on the sole ground that those acquisitions took place in the period during which its value added tax identification number was de-activated and where the substantive requirements have been satisfied and the right of deduction is not being invoked fraudulently or abusively.
(1) OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy