Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 July 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Baranya Megyei Bíróság — Hungary) — Pannon Gép Centrum Kft v APEH Központi Hivatal Hatósági Főosztály Dél-dunántúli Kihelyezett Hatósági Osztály

(Case C-368/09) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Directive 2006/112/EC - Right to deduct input tax - National legislation penalising an error in the invoice by loss of the right to deduct)

2010/C 246/18

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Baranya Megyei Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Pannon Gép Centrum Kft

Defendant: APEH Központi Hivatal Hatósági Főosztály Dél-dunántúli Kihelyezett Hatósági Osztály

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Baranya Megyei Biróság — Interpretation of Articles 17(1), 18(1) and 22(3)(a) and (b) of Directive 77/388/EEC: Sixth Council Directive 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), and of Council Directive 2001/115/EC of 20 December 2001 amending Directive 77/388/EEC with a view to simplifying, modernising and harmonising the conditions laid down for invoicing in respect of value added tax (OJ 2002 L 15, p. 24) — Loss of the right to deduct for a recipient of services by reason of an error in the completion date of the works referred to in the invoice issued by the provider — National rules penalising any formal defect in the invoice by the loss of the right to deduct

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 167, 178(a), 220(1) and 226 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding national legislation or practice whereby the national authorities deny to a taxable person the right to deduct from the VAT which he is liable to pay the VAT due or paid in respect of services supplied to him on the grounds that the initial invoice, in the possession of the taxable person when the deduction is made, contained an incorrect completion date for the supply of services and the numbering of the subsequently corrected invoice and the credit note cancelling the initial invoice were not sequential, if the material conditions governing deduction are satisfied and, before the tax authority concerned has made a decision, the taxable person has submitted to the tax authority a corrected invoice stating the correct date on which that supply of services was completed, even though the numbering of that invoice and the credit note cancelling the initial invoice are not sequential.

(1)  OJ C 11, 16.1.2010.