CELEX: 62008CA0158
Language: en
Date: 2009-06-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-158/08: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste (Italy)) — Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Trieste v Pometon SpA (Community customs code — Regulation (EC) No 384/96 — Protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community — Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 — Protection of the European Communities’ financial interests — Processing under the inward processing procedure — Irregular practice)

1.8.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 180/18
            
         Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste (Italy)) — Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Trieste v Pometon SpA
   (Case C-158/08) (1)
   
   (Community customs code - Regulation (EC) No 384/96 - Protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 - Protection of the European Communities’ financial interests - Processing under the inward processing procedure - Irregular practice)
   2009/C 180/29
   Language of the case: Italian
   
      Referring court
   
   Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Trieste
   
      Defendant: Pometon SpA
   
      Re:
   
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste — Interpretation of Articles 114, 117(c), 202, 204, 212 and 240 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) and of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1) — Imports into the Community customs territory of unwrought magnesium originating in China — Imports through a company having its registered office in a non-member country and not subject to anti-dumping measures — Processing of the magnesium, under the inward processing procedure, by a company with its registered office in a Member State and connected to the company in the non-member country — Re-export in the form of compensating products to the said non-member country without being subjected to import duties — Immediate sale of the product by the non-member country company to the Member State company which carried out the processing
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community is inapplicable in the absence of a Council decision, adopted on a proposal from the Commission, to extend the application of anti-dumping duties to imports from third countries of like products or parts thereof.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               An operation which consists in merely sending goods over the border after processing them into a product which is not subject to anti-dumping duties without any actual intention to re-export them and re-importing them shortly after cannot lawfully be placed under inward processing procedure. An importer who improperly brings himself within that procedure and benefits from it is required to pay the duties on the products concerned, without prejudice, where appropriate, to administrative, civil or criminal sanctions provided for by national law. It is for the national court having jurisdiction in the matter to determine whether the operation concerned in the main proceedings must, in the light of the considerations set out above, be regarded as irregular in the light of Community law.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 158, 21.06.2008.