Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 28 November 2023 – S.C. Arcomet Towercranes S.R.L. v Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Administrația Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Mijlocii București

(Case C-726/23, Arcomet Towercranes)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant and appellant: S.C. Arcomet Towercranes S.R.L.

Defendants and respondents: Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Administrația Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Mijlocii București

Questions referred

Is Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax ¹ to be interpreted as meaning that the amount invoiced by a company (the principal company) to an associated company (the operating company), equal to the amount necessary to align the operating company’s profit with the activities carried out and the risks assumed in accordance with the margin method of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, constitutes a payment for a service which therefore falls within the scope of VAT?

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, with regard to the interpretation of Articles 168 and 178 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax, are the tax authorities entitled to require, in addition to the invoice, documents (for example, activity reports, [works] progress reports, and so forth) justifying the use of the services purchased for the purposes of the taxable person’s taxable transactions, or must that analysis of the right to deduct VAT be based solely on the direct link between purchase and supply or [between purchase and] the taxable person’s economic activity as a whole?

____________

¹ Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).