# C_2016296EN.01002001.xml

| 16.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/20

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Romania) lodged on 23 May 2016 — SC Exmitiani SRL v Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Cluj

(Case C-286/16)

(2016/C 296/26)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC Exmitiani SRL

Applicant:

Defendant: Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Cluj

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | In a situation such as that in the main proceedings, in which the disputed administrative measure was adopted before the accession [of the Republic of Romania to the European Union] and the appeal against that measure was decided on by provision of the tax authorities after the accession, does the principle of cooperation in good faith imply that national legislation is to be interpreted in the light of the EU directives applicable to VAT? (1) |
| --- | --- |

1.

In a situation such as that in the main proceedings, in which the disputed administrative measure was adopted before the accession [of the Republic of Romania to the European Union] and the appeal against that measure was decided on by provision of the tax authorities after the accession, does the principle of cooperation in good faith imply that national legislation is to be interpreted in the light of the EU directives applicable to VAT? (1)

1

| 2. | Having regard to the circumstances of the main proceedings, is the principle of legal certainty to be interpreted as precluding the practice of tax authorities whereby, on the basis of the same factual circumstances, those authorities reach different conclusions from those reached by the prosecution authorities as regards the exemption from VAT of the provision of services directly connected with international passenger transport? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Having regard to the circumstances of the main proceedings, is the principle of legal certainty to be interpreted as precluding the practice of tax authorities whereby, on the basis of the same factual circumstances, those authorities reach different conclusions from those reached by the prosecution authorities as regards the exemption from VAT of the provision of services directly connected with international passenger transport?

| 3. | Is the principle of cooperation in good faith to be interpreted as precluding domestic legislation which provides that, where pleas based on provisions of EU law are not raised in an appeal against an administrative measure, such pleas may not be raised subsequently before the courts? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is the principle of cooperation in good faith to be interpreted as precluding domestic legislation which provides that, where pleas based on provisions of EU law are not raised in an appeal against an administrative measure, such pleas may not be raised subsequently before the courts?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

1

---