- 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-351/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 12 July 2010 — Zollamt Linz Wels
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0351
62010CN0351
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
9.10.2010
Official Journal of the European Union
C 274/10
(Case C-351/10)
()
2010/C 274/14
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Zollamt Linz Wels
Defendant: Unabhängiger Finanzsenat Außenstelle Salzburg
Intervening party: LAKI D.O.O.E.L
Questions referred
1.Is Article 558(1) in conjunction with Article 555(1)(c) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 (‘the Customs Code Implementing Provisions’), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 993/2001 of 4 May 2001, to be interpreted as meaning that there is an unauthorised use of a means of transport in internal traffic as soon as the means of transport is loaded and the transport operation begins, in cases where authorisation has been granted for a vehicle for commercial use to be employed in internal traffic between two Member States, the vehicle is loaded in one of the two Member States but the destination (the planned place of unloading) is situated in a Member State other than those two Member States and authorisation has not been granted in respect of that other Member State?
2.If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is Article 204(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 215 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 (‘the Customs Code’) to be interpreted as meaning that, in the abovementioned circumstances, the customs debt is incurred in the Member State of loading and that that Member State is responsible for collecting the import duties, even though it is established only upon unloading that the transport operation took place in a Member State in respect of which there is no authorisation for use in internal traffic?
3.Furthermore, if the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is Article 61 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 to be interpreted as meaning that, in the abovementioned circumstances, importation takes place in the Member State of loading and that that Member State is responsible for collecting the import turnover tax, even though it is established only upon unloading that the transport operation took place in a Member State in respect of which there is no authorisation for use in internal traffic?
Language of the case: German
(1) OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1.
(2) OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1.
(3) OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.