* click here if you have interesting news to share *

ECJ C-610/19 (Vikingo Fővállalkozó) – Questions – Input VAT, artificial transactions, proof and proportionality

Questions have been raised to the ECJ by the Hungarian court.

  • Vikingo is a wholesaler in sugar and confectionery.
  • On the same location as where Vikingo is based, another company is also based: Nikus Kft site.
  • The driver of these two companies is the same person.
  • Nikus Kft. produces the confectionery that Vikingo packs, stores and sells.
  • Vikingo has an agreement with Freest Kft. for the delivery of ten packaging machines and one loading machine and claimed input VAT.
  • Freest Kft. purchased these goods from SPDC Kft., which in turn had acquired them from Free-Gold Kft. Bee
  • During a tax audit, the VAT authorities imposed an assessment.
  • The authorities argue that Vikingo’s goal was to create an artificial input VAT claim for itself.
  • The questions focus on what proof is required to substantiate input VAT recovery.
  • There are also questions regarding chain transactions and proportionality of sanctions.

Source: (Dutch)