Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2016:455
Date: 2016-06-16
Language of the case: Hungarian
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Customs Union
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Hungary

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 16 June 2016 Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Value for customs purposes — Transaction value — Determination — Existence of doubts as to the veracity of the declared price — Reference to the transaction value of similar goods — Lawfulness — Condition (Council Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 82/97, Arts 30 and 31; Commission Regulation No 2454/93, as amended by Regulation No 3254/94, Art. 181a) Article 181a of Regulation No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation No 3254/94, must be interpreted as not precluding a customs authority practice whereby the customs value of imported goods is determined on the basis of the transaction value of similar goods, the method in Article 30 of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 82/97, where the declared transaction value is considered to be unreasonably low in comparison with the statistical average of the purchase prices verified in the context of the importation of similar goods and despite the fact that the customs authority does not refute or call into question the authenticity of the invoice or the bank transfer certificate produced in order to establish the price actually paid for the imported goods, without the importer having submitted, in response to a request to that effect from the customs authority, additional evidence to demonstrate the accuracy of the declared transaction value of those goods. The customs authorities can, for the purposes of determining the customs value, disregard the declared price of imported goods and use secondary methods to determine the customs value of imported goods, as laid down in Articles 30 and 31 of Regulation No 2913/92 and, in particular, the sale price of similar goods, if their doubts concerning the transaction value of those goods persist after they have asked for additional information or documents and have provided the person concerned with a reasonable opportunity to respond to the grounds for those doubts. In that regard, in circumstances where it appears that the declared price is more than 50% lower than the statistical mean value, such a difference in price is sufficient to substantiate the customs authority’s doubts and its rejection of the declared customs value of the goods at issue. (see paras 35, 38, 39, 44, operative part)