EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019CN0095
Case C-95/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 6 February 2019 — Agenzia delle Dogane v Silcompa SpA
Case C-95/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 6 February 2019 — Agenzia delle Dogane v Silcompa SpA
Case C-95/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 6 February 2019 — Agenzia delle Dogane v Silcompa SpA
OJ C 182, 27.5.2019, p. 11–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
27.5.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 182/11 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 6 February 2019 — Agenzia delle Dogane v Silcompa SpA
(Case C-95/19)
(2019/C 182/13)
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Corte suprema di cassazione
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: Agenzia delle Dogane
Respondent and cross-appellant: Silcompa SpA
Question referred
Is Article 12(3) of Council Directive 76/308/EEC on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to certain levies, duties, taxes and other measures (1), as amended by Council Directive 2001/44/EC (2), read in conjunction with Article 20 of Council Directive 92/12/EEC on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (3), to be interpreted as meaning that, in proceedings brought against enforcement measures for the collection of excise duty, the court may examine (and if so within what limits) the question of the place (of actual release for consumption) where the irregularity or offence was actually committed where, as in the present case, the same claim, based on the same export transactions, is made, independently, against the taxable person by both the applicant State and the requested State and, in the requested State, proceedings are pending, contemporaneously, both in respect of the national claim and the action for the collection of duties for the other State, and would the court’s finding in that regard invalidate the request for assistance and consequently all the enforcement measures?
(1) Council Directive 76/308/EEC of 15 March 1976 on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims resulting from operations forming part of the system of financing the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, and of the agricultural levies and customs duties (OJ 1976 L 73, p. 18).
(2) Council Directive 2001/44/EC of 15 June 2001 amending Directive 76/308/EEC on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims resulting from operations forming part of the system of financing the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, and of agricultural levies and customs duties and in respect of value added tax and certain excise duties (OJ 2001 L 175, p. 17).
(3) Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1).