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-426/12: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — X v Voorzitter van het managementteam van het onderdeel Belastingdienst/Z van de rijksbelastingdienst (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2003/96/EC — Taxation of energy products and electricity — Article 2(4)(b) — Dual use of energy products — Concept)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CA0426

62012CA0426

October 2, 2014
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

24.11.2014

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/3

(Case C-426/12) (<span class="super">1</span>)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2003/96/EC - Taxation of energy products and electricity - Article 2(4)(b) - Dual use of energy products - Concept))

2014/C 421/04

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: X

Respondent: Voorzitter van het managementteam van het onderdeel Belastingdienst/Z van de rijksbelastingdienst

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 2(4)(b) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, as amended by Council Directive 2004/74/EC of 29 April 2004, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact of using, firstly, coal as a heating fuel in the sugar production process and, secondly, carbon dioxide generated by the combustion of that energy product to produce chemical fertilizers does not constitute ‘dual use’ of that energy product within the meaning of that provision. However, the fact of using, firstly, coal as a heating fuel in the sugar production process and, secondly, carbon dioxide generated by the combustion of that energy product for the purposes of the same production process does constitute such ‘dual use’ if it is established that the sugar production process cannot be completed without using the carbon dioxide generated by the combustion of the coal.

2.A Member State is entitled to apply, in its national law, a more restrictive scope of the concept of ‘dual use’ than that which it has under the second indent of Article 2(4)(b) of Directive 2003/96, as amended by Directive 2004/74, in order to levy a tax on energy products excluded from the scope of that directive.

Language of the case: Dutch

*

(1) OJ C 399, 22.12.2012.

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