This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014CN0427
Case C-427/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 18 September 2014 — Valsts ieņēmumu dienests v SIA ‘Veloserviss’
Case C-427/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 18 September 2014 — Valsts ieņēmumu dienests v SIA ‘Veloserviss’
Case C-427/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 18 September 2014 — Valsts ieņēmumu dienests v SIA ‘Veloserviss’
OJ C 421, 24.11.2014, p. 21–21
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
24.11.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 421/21 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 18 September 2014 — Valsts ieņēmumu dienests v SIA ‘Veloserviss’
(Case C-427/14)
2014/C 421/30
Language of the case: Latvian
Referring court
Augstākā tiesa
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
Defendant: SIA ‘Veloserviss’
Questions referred
Should Article 78(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (1) of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code be interpreted as meaning that the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations limits the possibility of undertaking for a second time a post-clearance examination and revising the results of the first post-clearance examination?
May the national law of a Member State establish the procedure for the undertaking of post-clearance examinations provided for in Article 78(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992, establishing the Community Customs Code, and limits on the revision of the results of those examinations?
Should Article 78(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992, establishing the Community Customs Code, be interpreted as meaning that national legislation may legitimately contain limitations on the revision of the results of a first post-clearance examination, if information is received indicating that the provisions governing the customs procedure were applied on the basis of incorrect and incomplete information, a matter which was not known at the time of adopting the decision on the first post-clearance examination?