Rottendorf Pharma claimed inward processing relief but did not present the goods when they were re-exported. The CJEU has ruled that Rottendorf was not in a “special situation”.
Decision (unofficial translation):
The second indent of Article 239 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2913/92 of October 12, 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code is to be interpreted as meaning that, on the one hand, an economic operator can only apply for the reimbursement of customs duties paid by him if there is a special case with him and there is no apparent negligence or fraudulent intent on his part, and on the other hand the fact that the goods in question have been re-exported to a third country without entering the economic cycle of the Union is not sufficient to prove that this economic operator was in a special case. The same applies if the behavior on which the collection of the relevant customs duties is based was caused by an error.
Source Curia
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- ECJ VAT C-544/24 (Nekilnojamojo turto valdymas) – AG Opinion – National law’s fixed late payment interest aligns with EU law
- ECJ C-639/24 (FLO VENEER) – Judgment – VAT exemption cannot be denied due to missing specific evidence defined by Quick Fixes
- Briefing Document & Podcast: VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) – Single EU VAT Registration
- Briefing Document & Podcast: VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) – Platform Economy
- VAT Committee – General Principle for Calculating Annual Turnover under the SME Scheme
