Case C-495/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden by judgment of that Court of 21 November 2003 in the case of Intermodal Transports B.V. against Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Date: 2004-01-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, interpretation of the law, tariff nomenclature

24.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 21/23

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden by judgment of that Court of 21 November
2003 in the case of Senior Engineering Investments B.V.
against Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden by judgment of that Court of 21 November
2003 in the case of Intermodal Transports B.V. against
Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-494/03)

(2004/C 21/41)

(Case C-495/03)

(2004/C 21/42)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
the Hoge Raad
European Communities by judgment of
the Netherlands) of
der Nederlanden (Supreme Court of
21 November 2003, received at
the Court Registry on
24 November 2003, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
Senior Engineering Investments B.V. against Staatssecretaris
van Financiën on the following questions:

1. Does Article 4(2)(b) of Council Directive 69/335/EEC (1)
of 17 July 1969, as amended by Council Directive 85/
303/EEC (2) of 10 June 1985, permit capital duty to be
levied on a company in respect of a direct informal
capital contribution made by the parent of that company
to a subsidiary of
if so, what
circumstances are of relevance in that respect; in particu-
lar is it relevant whether or not that company must be
regarded, from an economic point of view, as the real
recipient of that direct informal capital contribution?

that company and,

2. Does

the freedom of establishment

laid down in
Article 52 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Article 43 EC), in conjunction with Article 58 of the EC
Treaty (now Article 48 EC), prohibit the tax authorities
of a Member State from pursing a policy which levies no
capital duty on a company in respect of a direct informal
capital contribution made by the parent of that company
to a subsidiary of that company, provided that that
subsidiary is established in that Member State, and is it
relevant in this respect — on the assumption that the
directive permits capital duty to be levied both on that
company and its subsidiary in a case such as the present
— whether or not more capital duty has been levied at
group level than would have been the case had both that
company and its subsidiary been established in the
Netherlands?

(1) Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning
indirect taxes on the raising of capital (OJ L 249 of 3.10.1969,
p. 25).

(2) Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985 amending Direc-
tive 69/335/EEC concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital
(OJ L 156 of 15.6.1985, p. 23).

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
the Hoge Raad
European Communities by judgment of
the Netherlands) of
der Nederlanden (Supreme Court of
21 November 2003, received at
the Court Registry on
24 November 2003, for a preliminary ruling in the case
of Intermodal Transports B.V. against Staatssecretaris van
Financiën on the following questions:

1.

Should a national court refer questions on the interpret-
ation of the Combined Nomenclature (CN) (1) to the
Court of Justice of the European Communities for a
preliminary ruling in the case where a party to a dispute
brought before it concerning classification in the CN of a
certain product invokes a decision by a customs authority
laid down in binding tariff information issued to a third
party in respect of a similar product and the national
court takes the view that that binding tariff information
is at variance with the CN?

2. Must heading 8709 of the CN be interpreted as covering
vehicles such as those in issue in the present case?

(1) CN: Position under the Combined Nomenclature as referred to in
Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July
1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the
Common Customs Tariff, OJ 1987 L 256.

Action brought on 24 November 2003 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the French
Republic

(Case C-496/03)

(2004/C 21/43)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 24 Novem-
ber 2003 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by C.-F. Durand and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.