header-logo header-logo

22 November 2013
Issue: 7585 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

VAT

Tulica v Agentia Nationala de Administrare Fiscala—Directia Generalia de Solutionare a Contestatilor and another case C-249/12 and C-250/12, [2013] All ER (D) 121 (Nov)

It followed from Arts 1(2) and 73 of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 (the VAT Directive) that the principle of the common system of VAT entailed the application to goods and services of a general tax on consumption exactly proportional to their price and that the taxable amount included everything which constituted consideration obtained or to be obtained by the supplier of goods or services for transactions with the purchaser, customer or a third party. Article 78 of that Directive listed certain items which were to be included in the taxable amount, and Art 78(a) provided that VAT was not to be included in the taxable amount. In accordance with the general rule set out in Art 73, the taxable amount for the supply of goods or services for consideration was the consideration actually received for them by the taxable person. That consideration was thus the subjective value, namely, the value received. That rule should

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll