In Tanoarch sro v Daňové riaditelstvo Slovenskej republiky (ECJ Case C-504/10) a company (T) reclaimed a substantial amount of input tax in respect of the purported purchase of a 50% co-ownership share in a patent which had not yet been registered from an associated company (V).
V subsequently went into administration without accounting for output tax on the transaction.
The tax authority rejected the claim considering that the transaction was an ‘abusive practice’.
T appealed and the case was referred to the ECJ which held that ‘a taxpayer may in principle claim a right of deduction of VAT paid or payable for the supply of a service carried out for consideration where the applicable national law permits the assignment of a share of the co-ownership of an invention which confers rights relating...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In Tanoarch sro v Daňové riaditelstvo Slovenskej republiky (ECJ Case C-504/10) a company (T) reclaimed a substantial amount of input tax in respect of the purported purchase of a 50% co-ownership share in a patent which had not yet been registered from an associated company (V).
V subsequently went into administration without accounting for output tax on the transaction.
The tax authority rejected the claim considering that the transaction was an ‘abusive practice’.
T appealed and the case was referred to the ECJ which held that ‘a taxpayer may in principle claim a right of deduction of VAT paid or payable for the supply of a service carried out for consideration where the applicable national law permits the assignment of a share of the co-ownership of an invention which confers rights relating...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
