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
(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
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
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.