EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-184/19: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 30 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bucureşti — Romania) — Hecta Viticol SRL v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) — Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor, Biroul Vamal de Interior Buzău, Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Galaţi (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directives 92/83/EEC and 92/84/EEC — Rates of excise duty on wine and still fermented beverages other than wine and beer — Differentiated rates of excise duty — Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CA0184

62019CA0184

April 30, 2020
With Google you find a lot.
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

Official Journal of the European Union

C 240/19

(Case C-184/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directives 92/83/EEC and 92/84/EEC - Rates of excise duty on wine and still fermented beverages other than wine and beer - Differentiated rates of excise duty - Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations)

(2020/C 240/25)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Hecta Viticol SRL

Respondents: Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) — Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor, Biroul Vamal de Interior Buzău, Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Galaţi

Operative part of the judgment

1.Articles 7, 11 and 15 of Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages and Article 5 of Council Directive 92/84/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the approximation of the rates of excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages must be interpreted as meaning that they do not require that identical rates of excise duty be fixed on alcoholic beverages in the category ‘wine’, within the meaning of Directive 92/83, and on those in the category ‘fermented beverages other than wine and beer’, within the meaning of that directive.

2.The principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation amending the rate of excise duty on fermented beverages other than wine and beer without laying down transitional arrangements, where such amendment enters into force eight days after the publication of the act on which it is based and where it does not mean that taxable persons carry out consequential economic adjustments, which it is for the referring court to ascertain.

(1)

OJ C 187, 3.6.2019.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia