C-168/06 Ceramika Paradyż sp. z oo

Order · Court of Justice · Poland · 6 March 2007

No jurisdiction over Polish additional VAT liability for pre-accession facts

What is the case?

Polish legislation provided for an additional tax charge where irregularities were found in a taxable person's VAT return. A Polish company challenged that additional liability, and the regional administrative court in Lodz referred questions on the second paragraph of Article 2 of the First Directive and on Articles 2, 10(1)(a), 10(2) and 27(1) of the Sixth Directive. The facts of the main proceedings, however, predated the accession of Poland to the European Union on 01-05-2004, which put the Court's jurisdiction in issue before any of that could be examined.

What is the Court asked?

Whether the First and Sixth VAT Directives preclude national legislation providing for the imposition of an additional tax charge where irregularities are found in the return submitted by the taxable person.

The Court’s decision

The Court does not answer. By reasoned order under the first subparagraph of Article 104(3) of its Rules of Procedure it declares that it has no jurisdiction to reply, because the facts of the dispute predate Polish accession and its power to interpret EU law runs only from the date of accession onwards. The substantive question, whether the Polish additional VAT liability is compatible with the directive, was answered later in Profaktor Kulesza and in Grupa Warzywna, which treated an automatic sanction with no regard to the nature of the irregularity as disproportionate.

AI-generated and factual. Not an official document: verify against the text below.

Legislation interpreted

Article 2 of Directive 2006/112/EC Subject matter and scope
Article 2 of Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC
Article 10 of Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC Chargeable event and chargeability of tax

Subject matter

Sixth VAT Directives · Facts pre-dating the accession of the Republic of Poland to the European Union · Jurisdiction of the Court Preliminary rulings · Jurisdiction of the Court · Limits (Art

Topics

Sixth VAT Directives · Jurisdiction of the Court Preliminary rulings

Record

Court: Court of Justice
Case number: C-168/06
ECLI: ECLI:EU:C:2007:139
Official texts: Order of 6 March 2007 (62006CO0168)
Cite as: Order of 6 March 2007, Ceramika Paradyż sp. z oo, C-168/06, EU:C:2007:139

Order of 6 March 2007

Text as published by the Court on EUR-Lex, CELEX 62006CO0168.

4. Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes a criminal penalty on persons such as the defendant in this case for pursuing the organised activity of collecting bets without a licence or a police authorisation as required under the national legislation, where those persons were unable to obtain licences or authorisations because that Member State, in breach of Community law, refused to grant licences or authorisations to such persons.

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 March 2007 — Ceramika Paradyź v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi

(Case C-168/06)

Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure — First and Sixth VAT Directives — Facts pre-dating the accession of the Republic of Poland to the European Union — Jurisdiction of the Court

Preliminary rulings — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits (Art. 234 EC) (see paras 21-25)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyny w Łodzi (Poland) — Interpretation of the second paragraph of Article 2 of First Council Directive 67/227/EEC of 11 April 1967 on the harmonisation of legislation of

I-29*

Member States concerning turnover taxes (OJ English Special Edition 1967(1), p. 14), and Articles 2, 10(1)(a), 10(2) and 27(1) of Directive 77/388/EEC: Sixth Council Directive of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — National legislation providing for the imposition of an additional tax in cases where irregularities are found in the return submitted by the taxable person.

Operative part

The Court of Justice of the European Communities has no jurisdiction to reply to the questions referred by the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyny w Łodzi.

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 March 2007 — Criminal proceedings against Gallo and Damonte

(Case C-191/06)

Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Games of chance — Collection of bets on sporting events — Licensing requirement — Exclusion of certain operators by reason of their type of corporate form — Requirement of police authorisation — Criminal penalties

Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Restrictions (Arts 43 EC and 49 EC) (see para. operative part 1-4) 7,

I-30*