ECJ C-346/19 (Y GmbH) – Judgment – For VAT refund request, consecutive invoice number is not always required

On Dec 17, 2020, the ECJ his decision in the ECJ Case C-346/19 (Y GmbH). This is a German referral asking whether an EU VAT refund claim for non-established persons, submitted using an invoice reference number rather than the invoice number itself, can be considered formally complete and submitted within the relevant deadline.

Article in the EU VAT Directive

Article 8(2)(d), 15(1) of Directive 2008/9

Facts

A German referral asking whether an EU VAT refund claim for non-established persons, submitted using an invoice reference number rather than the invoice number itself, can be considered formally complete and submitted within the relevant deadline?

Questions

The Bundesfinanzhof requested the ECJ to answer the following questions:

(1) Is article 8(2)(d) of Directive 2008/9 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in the EU VAT Directive (2006/112), to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State, according to which the refund application is to set out, for each Member State of refund and for each invoice, inter alia, the number of the invoice, to be interpreted as meaning that it is also sufficient to state the reference number of an invoice, which is shown in an invoice document as an additional classification criterion alongside the invoice number?

(2) If the above question is to be answered in the negative, is a refund application in which the reference number of an invoice has been indicated instead of the invoice number to be considered formally complete and submitted within the deadline for the purpose of the second sentence of article 15(1) of Directive 2008/9?

(3) Should consideration be given, when answering Question 2, to the fact that the taxable person not established in the Member State of refund was, from the point of view of a reasonable applicant, and given the design of the electronic portal in the State of establishment and the form provided by the Member State of refund, entitled to assume that, for the application to have been properly made, or in any event to be formally complete and timely, entering an indicator other than the invoice number is sufficient for the purpose of identifying the invoice to which the refund application relates?

AG Opinion

None

Decision

On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby rules:

Article 8(2)(d) and Article 15(1) of Council Directive 2008/9/EC of 12 February 2008 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State, as amended by Council Directive 2010/66/EU of 14 October 2010, must be interpreted as meaning that, where an application for a refund of value added tax does not contain a sequential number of the invoice, but does contain another number which allows that invoice, and thus the good or service in question, to be identified, the tax authority of the Member State of refund must consider that application ‘submitted’ within the meaning of Article 15(1) of Directive 2008/9, as amended by Directive 2010/66, and proceed with its assessment. In making that assessment, and save where that authority already has available to it the original invoice or a copy thereof, it may request that the applicant produce a sequential number which uniquely identifies the invoice and, if that request is not satisfied within the deadline of one month laid down in Article 20(2) of that directive, as amended by Directive 2010/66, it is entitled to reject the application for a refund.

Source