natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The original version of Article 147(1) of the implementing regulation, in force at the material time in the present case, provided that in such a case each price resulting from these sales could be taken as a basis for valuation.
V izvirni različici člena 147(1) Izvedbene uredbe, ki je veljala ob nastanku dejanskega stanja obravnavanega primera, je bilo določeno, da je mogoče v takem primeru vsako ceno, ki izhaja iz takih prodaj, vzeti kot osnovo za vrednotenje.
As appears from the judgment of the Court in Unifert, this means that, in the case of successive sales of goods for export to the customs territory of the Community, the importer is at liberty to select from the prices agreed for each of the sales the price which he will take as a basis for determining the customs value, provided that he can furnish to the customs authorities all the necessary particulars and documents relating to the price he chooses. 15
Kot izhaja iz sodbe Sodi�ča v zadevi Unifert, to pomeni, da v primeru zaporednih prodaj blaga za izvoz na carinsko območje Skupnosti uvoznik med cenami, ki so dogovorjene za vsako od prodaj, prosto izbere ceno, ki jo bo vzel za osnovo za določitev carinske vrednosti, če carinskim organom lahko predloži vse potrebne podatke in dokumente, ki se nana�ajo na ceno, ki jo izbere. 15
It should therefore be pointed out that that rule is, to a certain extent, at odds with the transaction-value method.
Zato je treba poudariti, da to pravilo ni povsem združljivo z metodo transakcijske vrednosti.
That concept seeks in particular, as I have mentioned above, 16to determine a customs value which reflects the actual economic value of imported goods, that is, the actual price of goods as they are declared for release into free circulation.
Namen te zasnove je zlasti, kot sem omenil zgoraj, 16določiti carinsko vrednost, ki odraža trenutno ekonomsko vrednost uvoženega blaga, torej trenutno ceno blaga, ko je prijavljeno za sprostitev v prosti promet.
In other words, the customs value should correspond as much as possible to the export price at the point when the goods reach the Community frontier, which is also illustrated by the fact that, according to Article 145 of the implementing regulation, reductions in the commercial value of the goods — for instance due to the loss or damaging of the goods — which have occurred after they have been purchased but before they have been released for free circulation, must result in a proportional reduction in the price actually paid or payable. 17
Povedano drugače, carinska vrednost naj bi, koliko se le da, ustrezala izvozni ceni, ko blago doseže mejo Skupnosti, kar ponazarja tudi dejstvo, da se morajo v skladu s členom 145 Izvedbene uredbe znižanja tržne vrednosti blaga – na primer zaradi izgube ali po�kodovanja blaga –, ki so se zgodila potem, ko je bilo to kupljeno, vendar pred njegovo sprostitvijo v prosti promet, odražati v sorazmernem znižanju cene, ki je dejansko plačana ali jo je treba plačati. 17
16 — See point 40 above.
16 – Glej točko 40 zgoraj.
15 — Unifert, cited in footnote 11, paragraphs 16 and 21.
15 – Sodba Unifert, navedena v opombi 11, točki 16 in 21.
That judgment referred to Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1224/80 of 28 May 1980 on the valuation of goods for customs purposes (OJ 1980 L 134, p.
Ta sodba se je sklicevala na člen 3(1) Uredbe Sveta (EGS) �t. 1224/80 z dne 28. maja 1980 o vrednotenju blaga za carinske namene (UL L 134, str.
1) and Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1495/80 of 11 June 1980 implementing certain provisions of Articles 1, 3 and 8 of the first-mentioned regulation (OJ 1980 L 154, p.
1) in člen 6 Uredbe Komisije (EGS) �t. 1495/80 z dne 11. junija 1980 o izvajanju nekaterih določb členov 1, 3 in 8 prvoomenjene uredbe (UL L 154, str.
14), which were, however, re-enacted in essentially the same terms in Article 29(1) of the Customs Code and Article 147(1) of the implementing regulation respectively.
14), ki pa sta bila v skoraj povsem enakem besedilu ponovno določena v členu 29(1) Carinskega zakonika oziroma v členu 147(1) Izvedbene uredbe.
17 — See also, to that effect, Case 183/85 Repenning [1986] ECR 1873, paragraph 18, and Unifert, cited in footnote 11, paragraph 35.
17 – V tem smislu glej tudi sodbo z dne 12. junija 1986 v zadevi Repenning (183/85, Recueil, str. 1873, točka 18) in sodbo Unifert, navedeno v opombi 11, točka 35.
CARBONI E DERIVATI the Community — at liberty a price relating to a prior sale of the goods.
CARBONI E DERIVATI ceno blaga, kot je bila dogovorjena za zadnjo prodajo, ki je pripeljala do vnosa blaga v Skupnost – dovoljuje svobodno izbiro cene, ki se nana�a na prej�njo prodajo blaga.
It is also for this very reason that, as the Commission has rightly pointed out, in the current version of Article 147(1) of the implementing regulation, as amended in 1995, it has been made clear that in the case of successive sales before valuation, the customs value is, as a rule, to be determined on the basis of the last sale which led to the introduction of the goods into the customs territory of the Community.
To je tudi razlog, kot je pravilno poudarila Komisija, da je v trenutni različici člena 147(1) Izvedbene uredbe, kot je bila spremenjena leta 1995, pojasnjeno, da je pri zaporednih prodajah pred vrednotenjem carinsko vrednost praviloma treba določiti na osnovi zadnje prodaje, ki je pripeljala do vnosa blaga na carinsko območje Skupnosti.
The declarant cannot, according to the amended Article 147(1) of the implementing regulation, without more declare a price which relates to a sale which took place before that last sale but must, in such a case, demonstrate to the satisfaction of the customs authorities that that sale prior to the last sale took place for export to the customs territory.
V skladu s spremenjenim členom 147(1) Izvedbene uredbe deklarant ne more samo prijaviti cene, ki se nana�a na prodajo, ki se je opravila pred zadnjo prodajo, ampak mora v takem primeru carinskim organom Skupnosti zadovoljivo dokazati, da se je prodaja blaga, ki se je opravila pred zadnjo, opravila zaradi izvoza na carinsko območje.
In my view, such an interpretation would, in particular, first, run counter to the trans-action-value concept underlying Community customs law, which requires that, as a rule, goods are valued on the basis of the price of the last sale before valuation leading to their introduction into the Community and that, as a consequence, exceptions to that rule are to be interpreted strictly.
Menim, da bi taka razlaga, prvič, zlasti nasprotovala zasnovi transakcijske vrednosti, na kateri temelji carinsko pravo Skupnosti, ki zahteva, da se blago praviloma vrednoti na podlagi cene zadnje prodaje pred vrednotenjem, ki pripelje do njegovega vnosa v Skupnost, zato se izjeme od tega pravila razlagajo ozko.
Secondly, the requirement of legal certainty and the need to protect the individual importer from discretionary imposition of customs duties and, in particular, antidumping duties, also mean that it cannot be left to the customs authorities to choose at liberty a price other than the one selected and declared by the declarant.
Drugič, zahteva po pravni varnosti in potreba po varstvu posameznega uvoznika pred samovoljno uvedbo carinskih dajatev, zlasti pred protidampin�kimi dajatvami, tudi pomeni, da carinskim organom ne more biti prepu�čeno, da bi prosto izbrali drugo ceno od tiste, ki jo izbere in prijavi deklarant.
Turning, however, to the question raised in the present case, it should be noted that, to my mind, it is only the declarant which Article 147(1) of the implementing regulation allows to choose, in the case of successive sales, a price relating to a sale which took place prior to the last sale on the basis of which the goods were introduced.
Če pa obravnavamo vpra�anje, ki se zastavlja v obravnavanem primeru, je treba navesti, da je po mojem mnenju le deklarant tisti, ki mu člen 147(1) Izvedbene uredbe ob zaporednih prodajah dovoljuje izbiro cene, ki se navezuje na prodajo, ki se je opravila pred zadnjo, na podlagi katere je bilo vne�eno blago.
Neither that provision, nor Article 29(1) of the Customs Code can, by contrast, be construed so as to allow the customs authority to select — in a case like that at hand, where the declarant has declared the price of the goods as agreed in the last sale leading to the introduction of the goods into
Nasprotno niti te določbe niti člena 29(1) Carinskega zakonika ni mogoče razlagati, kot da carinskim organom – v primeru, kot je obravnavani, v katerem je deklarant prijavil
It therefore appears that, according to the Customs Code and the implementing regulation, the customs value must in principle be determined on the basis of the price actually paid or payable for goods under the last sale before customs valuation if that price is declared by the importer.
Zato se zdi, da se mora v skladu s Carinskim zakonikom in Izvedbeno uredbo carinska vrednost načeloma določiti na osnovi cene, ki je dejansko plačana ali jo je treba plačati za blago ob zadnji prodaji pred carinskim vrednotenjem, če to ceno prijavi uvoznik.
Thus, the customs authorities may not refer in such a case to a price fixed on the occasion of a sale of the same goods which took place prior to that sale.
Torej se carinski organi v takem primeru ne smejo sklicevati na ceno, ki je bila določena ob prodaji istega blaga, ki se je opravila pred to prodajo.
Furthermore, the aims of the antidumping rules similarly do not, in my opinion and contrary to what the Italian Government seems to suggest, justify a different interpretation.
Dalje, podobno cilji protidampin�kih pravil po mojem mnenju – ki je nasprotno tistemu, za katerega se zdi, da ga zastopa italijanska vlada – ne upravičujejo drugačne razlage.
injury to Community industry. Contrary to the submissions of the Italian Government, Community antidumping legislation is not concerned with the sale of goods as such (as, for example, in the present case, the first sale of the hematite pig iron from OME-DTECH to CMP) before they are actually exported to the customs territory of the Community, even if a Community operator is a party to such a transaction.
bami italijanske vlade protidampin�ka pravila Skupnosti ne obravnavajo prodaje blaga kot takega (na primer – kot v obravnavanem primeru – prve prodaje surovega železa, pridobljenega iz hematita, družbe OME-DTECH družbi CMP), preden je dejansko izvoženo na carinsko območje Skupnosti, tudi če je gospodarski subjekt Skupnosti stranka take transakcije.
It should be noted in that regard that, according to Articles 1 and 2(1), respectively, of the basic decision, which are applicable to the provisional and the definitive decision at issue, 18 the rules on antidumping are aimed at protecting against ‘dumped or subsidised imports’ and an antidumping duty may be applied to any dumped product ‘whose release for free circulation in the Community causes injury’.
Glede tega je treba opozoriti, da je v skladu s členoma 1 in 2(1) osnovne odločbe, ki se uporabljata za začasno in dokončno odločbo v obravnavani zadevi, 18cilj protidampin�kih pravil za�čita proti „dampin�kemu ali subvencioniranemu uvozu“ in da je protidampin�ko dajatev mogoče uporabiti za kakr�en koli dampin�ki izdelek, „katerega sprostitev v prosti promet v Skupnosti povzroča �kodo“.
Furthermore, according to the definition contained in Article 2(2) of the basic decision, a product is to be considered to be dumped if its export price to the Community is less than the normal value of the like product.
Še več, v skladu z opredelitvijo iz člena 2(2) Osnovne uredbe se izdelek obravnava kot dampin�ki, če je njegova cena izvoza v Skupnost nižja od normalne vrednosti primerljivega izdelka.
Moreover, antidumping duties are intended to neutralise the dumping margin resulting essentially from the difference between the export price to the Community and the normal value of the product and to remove in that way the injurious effects of the import of the goods into the Community.
Še več, namen protidampin�kih dajatev je nevtralizirati stopnjo dampinga, ki je v bistvu rezultat razlike med ceno izvoza v Skupnost in normalno vrednostjo izdelka, ter s tem odstraniti �kodljive učinke uvoza blaga v Skupnost.
In the present case, the minimum price of ECU 149 per tonne laid down in the decision imposing the provisional duty and the decision imposing the definitive duty represents the price level at which imports of the hematite pig iron concerned cease to cause injury to Community industry. 19
V obravnavanem primeru najnižja cena 149 ECU na tono, ki je določena v Odločbi o uvedbi začasne dajatve in v Odločbi o uvedbi dokončne dajatve, pomeni raven cene, v vi�ini katere uvoz surovega železa, pridobljenega iz hematita, ne povzroča več �kode industriji Skupnosti. 19
It may be seen from those provisions that the application of an antidumping measure presupposes an introduction of goods into Community trade which cause
Iz teh določb je razvidno, da uporaba protidampin�kega ukrepa predpostavlja vnos blaga na trg Skupnosti, ki povzroča �kodo industriji Skupnosti. V nasprotju z naved-
It follows that if the price actually paid or payable by the declarant is above the minimum price laid down in an antidumping measure, there is, with regard to the object and purpose of the antidumping
Iz tega sledi, da glede na cilj in namen protidampin�kih pravil – če je cena, ki jo deklarant dejansko plača ali jo mora plačati, vi�ja od najnižje cene, določene v protidam-
18 — See also the corresponding provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on protection against dumped or subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (OJ 1988 L 209, p.
18 – Glej tudi ustrezne določbe Uredbe Sveta (EGS) �t. 2423/88 z dne 11. julija 1988 o za�čiti proti dampin�kemu ali subvencioniranem uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske gospodarske skupnosti (UL L 209, str.
1) (‘the basic regulation’) as well as Article 1 of the subsequent 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).
1) (v nadaljevanju: Osnovna uredba) ter člen 1 poznej�e Uredbe Sveta (ES) �t. 384/96 z dne 22. decembra 1995 o za�čiti proti dampin�kemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti (UL L 56, str. 1).
19 — See also recital 64 in the preamble to Decision No 67/94.
19 – Glej tudi uvodno izjavo 64 v preambuli Odločbe 67/94.
CARBONI E DERIVATI price stated on the invoice submitted is unreliable or falsified.
CARBONI E DERIVATI predloženem računu, neverodostojna ali izmi�ljena, kot se zdi, da je glede na predložitveni sklep napeljevalo Ministero delle Finanze.
rules, no reason to collect an antidumping duty by reference, for example, to a previous sale of the goods.
pin�kem ukrepu – ni razloga za naložitev protidampin�ke dajatve, na primer zaradi prej�nje prodaje blaga.
This is even so if a price above the set minimum price has specifically been agreed in order to avoid antidumping duty. 20
Tako je tudi, če je bila cena, vi�ja od najnižje cene, dogovorjena, da bi se izognili protidampin�ki dajatvi. 20
It should be recalled in that context that the Customs Code provides in Articles 30 and 31 for subsidiary valuation methods in cases where the customs value cannot be determined according to the transac-tion-value method under Article 29 of the Customs Code.
V tem okviru je treba opozoriti, da Carinski zakonik v členih 30 in 31 določa podredne metode vrednotenja za primere, ko carinske vrednosti ni mogoče določiti v skladu z metodo transakcijske vrednosti na podlagi člena 29 Carinskega zakonika.
Therefore, according to both customs and antidumping legislation, if the declarant chooses to declare a price relating to the last sale which led to the introduction of the goods into the Community, the customs authorities are not free to determine the customs value for the purposes of the imposition of an antidumping duty such as that at issue on the basis of a price relating to a prior sale of the same goods.
Zato tako v skladu s carinskimi kot protidampin�kimi pravili carinski organi za namene uvedbe protidampin�ke dajatve, kot je obravnavana, ne morejo prosto določiti carinske vrednost na podlagi cene, ki se nana�a na prej�njo prodajo tega blaga, če se deklarant odloči prijaviti ceno, ki se nana�a na zadnjo prodajo, ki je pripeljala do vnosa blaga v Skupnost.
It should be stressed that this applies, however, on condition that the declared value actually represents the price paid or payable for the goods.
Vendar je treba poudariti, da to velja ob pogoju, da prijavljena vrednost dejansko pomeni ceno, ki se za blago plača ali jo je treba plačati.
Accordingly, Article 181a of the implementing regulation as amended by Regulation No 3254/94 states that where the customs authorities have reasonable doubts that the declared value represents the total amount paid or payable, they need not determine the customs value according to the transaction-value method and that they may thus reject the price declared if those doubts continue after they may have asked for additional information in accordance with Article 178(4) of the Customs Code.
Zato je v členu 181a Izvedbene uredbe, kot je bila spremenjena z Uredbo �t. 3254/94, določeno, da carinskim organom, če upravičeno dvomijo, da prijavljena vrednost pomeni celoten plačani znesek ali znesek, ki ga je treba plačati, carinske vrednosti ni treba določati na osnovi metode transakcijske vrednosti in da smejo zato zavrniti prijavljeno ceno, če se ti dvomi nadaljujejo, potem ko so morebiti zaprosili za dodatne informacije v skladu s členom 178(4) Carinskega zakonika.
The situation is different in my view where there are reasonable doubts as to the veracity of the value declaration and where it is for example suspected that — as the Ministry of Finance appears, according to the order for reference, to have suggested — the
Menim, da je položaj drugačen, če obstajajo upravičeni dvomi glede tega, ali je navedba vrednosti pravilna, in če na primer obstaja sum, da je cena, ki je navedena na
Although that provision of the implementing regulation had not yet entered into force when the goods at issue were declared, it reflects, according to the information provided by the Commission, consistent customs practice — as already applied at the material time — and is in my view, moreover, in compliance with the system of the Customs Code.
Čeprav ta določba Izvedbene uredbe �e ni začela veljati, ko je bilo zadevno blago prijavljeno, glede na navedbe Komisije odraža carinsko prakso – ki je bila ustaljena že ob nastanku dejanskega stanja – in je poleg tega po mojem mnenju v skladu s sistematiko Carinskega zakonika.
Article 147(1) of the implementing regulation, considered acceptable as the transaction value of the goods.
Pa �e cena, dogovorjena ob predhodni prodaji, se ob pogojih iz člena 147(1) Izvedbene uredbe kot transakcijska vrednost blaga očitno obravnava kot sprejemljiva.
According to Article 29(2)(a) of the Customs Code, for example, the customs authorities may, in cases where buyer and seller are related, refuse to accept the transaction value determined in accordance with Article 29(1) of the Customs Code if, in the light of further information provided by the declarant or otherwise, and after the declarant has been given an opportunity to respond, the customs authorities consider that the relationship influenced the price.
V skladu s členom 29(2)(a) Carinskega zakonika smejo na primer carinski organi v primerih, ko sta kupec in prodajalec povezana, zavrniti transakcijsko vrednost, določeno v skladu s členom 29(1) Carinskega zakonika, če ob upo�tevanju nadaljnjih informacij, ki jih je zagotovil deklarant ali so jih pridobili iz drugih virov, in potem, ko so deklarantu dali možnost za odgovor, menijo, da je razmerje vplivalo na ceno.
It appears therefore that if the customs authorities have — after they have asked for additional information — reasons of the kind outlined above at point 62 to refuse a valuation of goods on the basis of the price declared, they may, according to the system of customs valuation as laid down in the Customs Code, refer to a price indicated in a sale of the same goods which took place prior to that on the basis of which the value declaration was made.
Zato se zdi, da se carinski organi, če imajo – potem ko so zaprosili za dodatne informacije – razloge, kot so tisti, ki so opredeljeni v točki 62 zgoraj, za zavrnitev vrednotenja blaga na podlagi prijavljene cene, v skladu s sistematiko carinskega vrednotenja, kot je določena v Carinskem zakoniku, lahko sklicujejo na prodajno ceno istega blaga, ki je bila določena pred ceno, na podlagi katere je bila navedena vrednost.
In such cases, where the transaction value cannot be accepted for any reason, the Customs Code provides that the customs value is in principle to be determined by subsidiary valuation methods, ranging from determination by reference to the transaction value of identical goods sold for export under Article 30(2)(a) of the Customs Code to the use of other reasonable means as provided for by Article 31 of the Customs Code.
V takih primerih, ko transakcijske vrednosti iz kakr�nega koli razloga ni mogoče sprejeti, Carinski zakonik določa, da je carinsko vrednost načeloma treba določiti s podrednimi metodami vrednotenja, ki segajo od določitve s sklicevanjem na transakcijsko vrednost enakega blaga, ki je bilo prodano za izvoz, na podlagi člena 30(2)(a) Carinskega zakonika do uporabe drugih ustreznih metod, kot so določene v členu 31 Carinskega zakonika.
In the light of all the foregoing considerations I conclude that according to the principles of Community customs law and for the purposes of the application of an antidumping duty such as that laid down by the decision imposing a provisional duty, the customs authorities are not at liberty to determine the customs value on the basis of a price fixed on the occasion of a sale prior to the one on the basis of which the customs valuation was made, if the price declared is the price actually paid or payable by the importer.
Ob upo�tevanju vsega navedenega sklepam, da v skladu z načeli carinskega prava Skupnosti in za namene uporabe protidampin�ke dajatve, kot je določena z Odločbo o uvedbi začasne dajatve, carinski organi ne morejo prosto izbirati carinske vrednosti na podlagi cene, ki je bila določena pred tisto, na podlagi katere se je opravilo carinsko vrednotenje, če je prijavljena cena cena, ki jo je uvoznik dejansko plačal ali jo mora plačati.
However, if the customs authorities have reasonable doubts that the declared value represents the total amount actually
Vendar je treba glede obravnavanega vpra�anja, in sicer ali se carinski organi lahko sklicujejo na ceno, ki je bila določena ob prodaji, ki se je opravila pred zadnjo, ki je pripeljala do vnosa zadevnega blaga, in na podlagi katere je bila predložena carinska
Furthermore, the price agreed on the occasion of a previous sale is apparently, under the conditions of
Vendar, če carinski organi upravičeno dvomijo, da prijavljena vrednost pomeni celoten plačan znesek ali znesek, ki ga je
CARBONI E DERIVATI paid or payable for the goods concerned, they may, if those doubts are confirmed after having asked for additional information and after having provided the person concerned with a reasonable opportunity to respond, as provided for in the Customs Code and the implementing regulation, calculate the customs value for purposes of the application of the antidumping duty by reference to a price agreed on the occasion of a prior sale of the goods concerned for export to the Community.
CARBONI E DERIVATI treba plačati za zadevno blago, smejo – če se ti dvomi potrdijo, potem ko zaprosijo za dodatne informacije in potem ko so zadevni osebi primerno omogočili, da odgovori, kot določata Carinski zakonik in Izvedbena uredba – carinsko vrednost za namene uporabe protidampin�ke dajatve izračunati na podlagi cene, ki je bila dogovorjena ob prej�nji prodaji zadevnega blaga za izvoz v Skupnost.
In the light of the foregoing I propose that the reply to the question referred to the Court should be:
Ob upo�tevanju zgoraj navedenega predlagam, naj Sodi�če na predloženo vpra�anje odgovori: