CELEX: 62013CA0165
Language: en
Date: 2014-07-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-165/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Stanislav Gross v Hauptzollamt Braunschweig (Taxation — Directive 92/12/EEC — Articles 7, 8 and 9 — General arrangements for products subject to excise duty — Products released for consumption in one Member State and held for commercial purposes in another Member State — Whether excise duty is chargeable to a person holding those products who has acquired them in the Member State of destination — Acquisition at the end of the entry process)

1.9.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 292/7
            
         Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Stanislav Gross v Hauptzollamt Braunschweig
   (Case C-165/13) (1)
   
   ((Taxation - Directive 92/12/EEC - Articles 7, 8 and 9 - General arrangements for products subject to excise duty - Products released for consumption in one Member State and held for commercial purposes in another Member State - Whether excise duty is chargeable to a person holding those products who has acquired them in the Member State of destination - Acquisition at the end of the entry process))
   2014/C 292/09
   Language of the case: German
   
      Referring court
   
   Bundesfinanzhof
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Stanislav Gross
   
      Defendant: Hauptzollamt Braunschweig
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 9(1) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, as amended by Council Directive 92/108/EEC of 14 December 1992, read in conjunction with Article 7 of that directive, must be interpreted as allowing a Member State to designate as liable to excise duty a person who holds for commercial purposes, on the fiscal territory of that State, products subject to excise duty that have been released for consumption in another Member State, in circumstances such as those of the case before the referring court, even though that person was not the first holder of those products in the Member State of destination.
   
      (1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.