Odbor kompatibility s právem ES
Úřad vlády ČR
I S A P
Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury
ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů

Číslo (Kód CELEX):
Number (CELEX Code):		61976J0020
Název:
Title: 		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 16 FEBRUARY 1977. SCHOETTLE AND SOEHNE OHG V FINANZAMT FREUDENSTADT. PRELIMINARY RULING REQUESTED BY THE FINANZGERICHT BADEN-WUERTTEMBERG. CASE 20-76.
Publikace:
Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1977 PAGES 0247 - 0262
Předmět (klíčová slova):
Keywords		TAXATION;TRANSPORT;
Související předpisy:
Corresponding acts:		157E095
Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty:
Corresponding Judgements:
Plný text:
Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:


Názor soudu a komentář:


Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. AS THE CONCEPT OF INTERNAL TAXATION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 95 OF THE EEC TREATY MUST BE GIVEN A WIDE INTERPRETATION, TAXATION' IMPOSED INDIRECTLY ON PRODUCTS' MUST BE INTERPRETED AS ALSO INCLUDING A CHARGE IMPOSED ON INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT OF GOODS BY ROAD ACCORDING TO THE DISTANCE COVERED ON THE NATIONAL TERRITORY AND THE WEIGHT OF THE GOODS IN QUESTION.

2. ARTICLE 95 IS INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT THE APPLICATION OF INTERNAL TAXATION IN ONE MEMBER STATE DOES NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF IMPOSING ON PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN OTHER MEMBER STATES TAXATION IN EXCESS OF THAT IMPOSED ON SIMILAR DOMESTIC PRODUCTS AND IT IS THEREFORE IRRELEVANT THAT THE TAXATION IS ALSO IMPOSED ON THE SAME CONDITIONS ON NATIONAL PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EXPORTED AND ON IMPORTED PRODUCTS.

3. IN ORDER TO COMPARE THE TAX ON GOODS MOVING WITHIN THE NATIONAL TERRITORY WITH THAT ON THE IMPORTED PRODUCT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 95, ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN OF BOTH THE BASIS OF ASSESSMENT OF THE TAX AND THE ADVANTAGES OR EXEMPTIONS WHICH EACH TAX CARRIES WITH IT. IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL JUDGE TO COMPARE IN SPECIFIC CASES THE SITUATIONS WHICH MAY ARISE.

4. THE MINOR AND INCIDENTAL NATURE OF THE OBSTACLE CREATED BY A NATIONAL TAX AND THE FACT THAT IT COULD ONLY HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IN PRACTICE BY ABOLISHING THE TAX ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO PREVENT ARTICLE 95 FROM BEING APPLICABLE.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):