- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-326/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā apgabaltiesa (Latvia) lodged on 22 July 2020 — SIA MONO v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CN0326
62020CN0326
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
5.10.2020
Official Journal of the European Union
C 329/5
(Case C-326/20)
(2020/C 329/07)
Language of the case: Latvian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant at first instance and appellant on appeal: SIA MONO
Defendant and appellant on appeal: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
Questions referred
1.Must Article 12(1) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC (1) be interpreted as meaning that excise goods intended to be used in the context of diplomatic or consular relations are to be exempted from excise duty on the condition that payment for the goods in question is to be made by non-cash means, that payment has actually been made, and that the payment to the supplier was made by the actual recipients of the goods?
2.Must Article 12(2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC be interpreted as meaning that Member States may lay down conditions and limitations which, in the context of diplomatic and consular relations, make the exemption from duty for excise goods subject to the requirement that the purchaser of the goods has actually paid for the goods by non-cash means?
* Language of the case: English.
(1) OJ 2009 L 9, p. 12.