Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.
| Jurisdiction | European Union |
| Celex Number | 62000CJ0078 |
| ECLI | ECLI:EU:C:2001:579 |
| Court | Court of Justice (European Union) |
| Docket Number | C-78/00 |
| Procedure Type | Recurso por incumplimiento – fundado |
| Date | 25 October 2001 |
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 October 2001. - Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic. - Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Articles 17 and 18 of the Sixth VAT Directive - Issue of Government bonds to refund excess VAT - Category of taxable persons whose tax position is in credit. - Case C-78/00.
European Court reports 2001 Page I-08195
Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part
Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Deduction of input tax - Refund of excess - Refund by the issue of Government bonds - Not permissible
(Council Directive 77/388, Arts 17 and 18(4))
Summary$$A Member State which provides for the refund of excess VAT by the issue of Government bonds to a category of taxable persons whose tax position is in credit fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 17 and 18 of Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes.
The conditions for a refund that a Member State sets under Article 18(4) of the Sixth Directive must enable the taxable person, in appropriate conditions, to recover the entirety of the credit arising from that excess tax, which implies that the refund is carried out within a reasonable period of time by a payment in liquid funds or equivalent means; the method of refund adopted must not, in any event, entail any financial risk for the taxable person.
( see paras 34, 39 and operative part )
PartiesIn Case C-78/00,
Commission of the European Communities, represented by E. Traversa, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
applicant,
v
Italian Republic, represented by U. Leanza, acting as Agent, assisted by G. De Bellis, avvocato dello Stato, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
defendant,
APPLICATION for a declaration that, by providing that the category of taxable persons whose tax position for 1992 is in credit be belatedly issued with Government bonds instead of refunds of value added tax, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 17 and 18 of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995 amending Directive 77/388/EEC and introducing new simplification measures with regard to value added tax - scope of certain exemptions and practical arrangements for implementing them (OJ 1995 L 102, p. 18),
THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: S. von Bahr (Rapporteur), President of the Fourth Chamber, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges,
Advocate General: J. Mischo,
Registrar: R. Grass,
having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 7 June 2001,
gives the following
Judgment
Grounds1 By application lodged at the Registry of the Court on 2 March 2000 the Commission of the European Communities brought proceedings under Article 226 EC seeking a declaration that, by providing that the category of taxable persons whose tax position for 1992 is in credit be belatedly issued with Government bonds instead of refunds of value added tax (VAT), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 17 and 18 of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995 amending Directive 77/388/EEC and introducing new simplification measures with regard to value added tax - scope of certain exemptions and practical arrangements for implementing them (OJ 1995 L 102, p. 18, the Sixth Directive)
Community law
2 Article 17(1) and (2) of the Sixth Directive provide as follows:
1. The right to deduct shall arise at the time when the deductible tax becomes chargeable.
2. In so far as the goods and services are used for the purposes of his taxable transactions, the taxable person shall be entitled to deduct from the tax which he is liable to pay:
(a) value added tax due or paid within the territory of the country in respect of goods or services supplied or to be supplied to him by another taxable person;
(b) value added tax due or paid in respect of imported goods;
(c) value added tax due under Articles 5(7)(a), 6(3) and 28a(6);
(d) value added tax due under Article 28a(1)(a).
3 Article 18(4) of the Sixth Directive provides:
Where for a given tax period the amount of authorised deductions exceeds the amount of tax due, the Member States may either make a refund or carry the excess forward to the following period according to conditions which they shall determine.
However, Member States may refuse to refund...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Opinion of Advocate General Kokott delivered on 21 January 2021.
...apartados 33 y 64; de 10 de julio de 2008, Sosnowska (C‑25/07, EU:C:2008:395), apartado 17, y de 25 de octubre de 2001, Comisión/Italia (C‑78/00, EU:C:2001:579), apartado 16 Sentencias de 23 de abril de 2020, Sole-Mizo y Dalmandi Mezőgazdasági (C‑13/18 y C‑126/18, EU:C:2020:292), apartado 3......
-
Enel Maritsa Iztok 3 AD v Direktor «Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto» NAP.
...18 décembre 1997, Molenheide e.a., C‑286/94, C‑340/95, C‑401/95 et C‑47/96, Rec. p. I‑7281, point 47; du 25 octobre 2001, Commission/Italie, C‑78/00, Rec. p. I‑8195, point 28, ainsi que du 10 juillet 2008, Sosnowska, C‑25/07, Rec. p. I‑5129, point 14). 32 Ainsi que la Cour l’a itérativement......
-
European Commission v Republic of Hungary.
...szóló 2007. évi CXXVII. törvény (en lo sucesivo, «Ley húngara del IVA»). 5 – Adózás rendjéről szóló 2003. évi XCII törvény. 6 – Asunto C‑78/00, Rec. p. I‑8195. 7 – Véanse en particular las sentencias de 5 de marzo de 2009, J D Wetherspoon (C‑302/07, Rec. p. I‑1467), apartados 34 y 57; de 29......
-
Alicja Sosnowska v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej we Wrocławiu Ośrodek Zamiejscowy w Wałbrzychu.
...es precisa la verificación adicional, son de aplicación mutatis mutandis. 8 – Véase la sentencia de 25 de octubre de 2001, Comisión/Italia (C‑78/00, Rec. p. I‑8195), apartados 32 y 33. 9 – Ibidem, apartado 34. 10 – Véanse al respecto las conclusiones del Abogado General Fennelly en los asun......
-
Identificación del proveedor a efectos de la deducción en el impuesto sobre el valor añadido
...la sentencia del TJUE de 6 septiembre 2012, caso Gabor Toth, causa C-324/11. 36. Sentencias de 25 octubre 2001, caso Comisión/Italia, causa C-78/00, apartado 28; de 10 julio 2008, caso causa C-25/07, apartado 14, y de 21 junio 2012, caso Mahagében y Dávid, causa C-80/11, apartado 37. 37. Se......
-
La evolución de la jurisprudencia del tribunal de justicia de la Unión Europea en relación a las obligaciones formales en el marco del iva y su proyección sobre nuestros tribunales de justicia y nuestra doctrina administrativa
...Ghent Coal Terminal ), de 21 de marzo de 2000 (Asuntos acumulados C-110/98 a C-147/98, Gabalfrisa ) y de 25 de octubre de 2001, (Asunto C-78/00, Comisión/Italia ), ha reiterado que dichas obligaciones están pensadas para facilitar la correcta aplicación de dicho Impuesto, de cuyo mecanismo ......