Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht München — Germany) — British American Tobacco (Germany) GmbH v Hauptzollamt Schweinfurt

(Case C-550/08) (1)

(Directive 92/12/EEC - Products subject to excise duty - Importation of raw tobacco not subject to excise duty under the inward processing procedure - Processing into cut tobacco - Movement between Member States - Accompanying document)

2010/C 221/10

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: British American Tobacco (Germany) GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Schweinfurt

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht München — Interpretation of Articles 5(2) and 15(4) of 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) — Cut tobacco subject to excise duty, manufactured in a Member State under an inward processing procedure in the form of a suspension system from raw tobacco which was not subject to excise duty when it was imported into Community territory — Whether, for purposes of applying the duty-suspension arrangements to the intra-Community movement of that tobacco product, an accompanying document drawn up by the consignor in accordance with Article 18(1) of Directive 92/12/EEC is required

Operative part of the judgment

The first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 5(2) of 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 must be interpreted as meaning that products subject to excise duty (such as manufactured tobacco) which are manufactured from products not subject to excise duty (such as raw tobacco) and imported into the Community under the inward-processing procedure are to be deemed to be subject to duty-suspension arrangements, within the meaning of that provision, even though they have become products subject to excise duty only by virtue of having been processed within Community territory, with the result that they can move between Member States without the administrative authorities being entitled to insist on production of the administrative or commercial document provided for in Article 18(1) of that directive.

(1)  OJ C 69, 21.03.2009.