# C_2021035EN.01003602.xml

| 1.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/36

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 13 November 2020 — UAB ‘Baltic Master’ v Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

(Case C-599/20)

(2021/C 35/49)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: UAB ‘Baltic Master’

Defendant: Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 29(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (1) of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code and Article 143(1)(b), (e) or (f) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (2) of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code be interpreted as meaning that the buyer and the seller are deemed to be related persons in cases where, as in the present case, in the absence of documents (official data) proving business partnership or control, the circumstances surrounding the conclusion of transactions are, however, on the basis of objective evidence, characteristic, not of the performance of economic activities under normal conditions, but rather of cases in which (1) there are particularly close business relations based on a high level of mutual trust between the parties to the transaction, or (2) one party to the transaction controls the other or both parties to the transaction are controlled by a third party? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 29(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (1) of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code and Article 143(1)(b), (e) or (f) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (2) of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code be interpreted as meaning that the buyer and the seller are deemed to be related persons in cases where, as in the present case, in the absence of documents (official data) proving business partnership or control, the circumstances surrounding the conclusion of transactions are, however, on the basis of objective evidence, characteristic, not of the performance of economic activities under normal conditions, but rather of cases in which (1) there are particularly close business relations based on a high level of mutual trust between the parties to the transaction, or (2) one party to the transaction controls the other or both parties to the transaction are controlled by a third party?

| 2. | Must Article 31(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 be interpreted as prohibiting determination of the customs value on the basis of information contained in a national database relating to one customs value of goods which have the same origin and which, although not similar, within the meaning of Article 142(1)(d) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93, are ascribed to the same TARIC heading? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Must Article 31(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 be interpreted as prohibiting determination of the customs value on the basis of information contained in a national database relating to one customs value of goods which have the same origin and which, although not similar, within the meaning of Article 142(1)(d) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93, are ascribed to the same TARIC heading?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1).

---