Review of a final decision by which the problem related to the application of the priority principle of the Union law has already been clarified

CONTENCIOS ADMINISTRATIV ŞI FISCAL

Abstract

A motion for revision is inadmissible, based on the provisions of Article 21 of the Administrative Law no. 554/2004, by which, in the absence of any new element (which may be decisions passed by the CJEU or orders of the Union law not relied on in the case or, even if relied on, they are not settled by the court), it is intended to review a final decision under which the problem related to the application of the priority principle of the Union law has already been clarified, since the nature of the review, of extraordinary remedy at law of withdrawal (and not of recast), correlated with the principle of the authority of res judicata. Directive 2006/112/EC of the Council on the common system of value added tax promotes the fight against fraud and tax avoidance and, in this context, the right to deduct VAT may be refused if it is determined, in relation to any objective items, that this right (to deduct) is invoked in a fraudulent or abusive manner. The rule shall apply also when the fraud is committed by the taxable person requesting the deduction, however, it is also applied when a taxable person knew or should have known that, by its purchase, it participates in an operation involved in a fraud in the VAT matter.