Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 November 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden - Netherlands) - Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Sixth VAT Directive - Interpretation of Articles 13B(g) and 4(3)(a) - Supply of land occupied by a partly demolished building in place of which a new building is to be constructed - VAT Exemption)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV
Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling - Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, The Hague - Interpretation of Article 4(3)(a), read in conjunction with Article 13B(g), 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) - Taxation of the supply of a building or part of a building and the adjacent ground prior to its first occupation - Supply of a partially demolished building by reason of its replacement by a new building to be constructed
Operative part of the judgment
Article 13B(g) of the 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, in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) of the directive must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax provided for in Article 13B(g) does not cover the supply of land still occupied by a dilapidated building that is to be demolished and replaced by a new building and whose demolition, paid for by the vendor, had already begun before the actual supply took place. For value added tax purposes, such supply and such demolition form a single transaction, given that, taken as a whole, the aim of the transactions was not to supply the existing building and the land it stands on but land that has not been built on, regardless of how far demolition of the old building had progressed at the moment the land was actually supplied.
____________1 - OJ C 69 of 21.03.2009