CAAD 185/2016-T: ISV Additional Assessment on Vehicle Transformation – Objective Incidence and Taxable Event

ARBITRAL DECISION

I – REPORT

1. The company A…, Limitada, hereinafter Claimant, legal person no. …, with registered office at …, …-… …, filed, on 24 March 2016, a request for constitution of an arbitral tribunal and for an arbitral award, in accordance with the provisions of articles 2, no. 1, subparagraph a) and 15 et seq., both of Decree-Law no. 10/2011, of 20 January, which approved the Legal Framework for Arbitration in Tax Matters, hereinafter "LFATM", and articles 99 et seq., of the Tax Procedure and Process Code (TPPC), in which the Tax and Customs Authority (TCA) is the Respondent.

In the said arbitral award, it was requested that the complaint be declared admissible, as proven, and that the additional assessment of Motor Vehicle Tax (MVT), relating to seven vehicles duly admitted, in the total amount of € 13,672.50, be annulled.

2. In accordance with the provisions of articles 6, no. 1 and 11, no. 1, subparagraph a), of the LFATM, the Deontological Council of the Centre for Administrative Arbitration (CAAD) appointed the undersigned as sole arbitrator on 25 May 2016, and the latter communicated acceptance of such appointment.

3. On 25 May 2016, the Parties were notified of such appointment, in accordance with the combined provisions of article 11, no. 1, subparagraph b) of the LFATM, with articles 6 and 7 of the CAAD Deontological Code, and neither party manifested an intention to challenge the appointment of the arbitrator.

In these circumstances, in compliance with the provisions of article 11, no. 1, subparagraph c) of the LFATM, the sole arbitral tribunal was constituted on 14 June 2016.

4. In accordance with article 17, nos. 1 and 2 of the LFATM, the TCA was notified, as the respondent party, to submit a response within a period of 30 days and, if it considered appropriate, to request the production of additional evidence, and within the same period a copy of the administrative file was to be sent, having submitted its response on 17 August 2016, with the respective administrative file.

In the subsequent proceedings, the Institute of Mobility and Transport I.P., (IMT) was notified by arbitral order of 19 September 2016, for the purpose of attaching to the file the technical homologation processes that were conducted in that institute for purposes of assigning registration to the vehicles, which was followed by an insistence, and a response was obtained on 17 November 2016, through the District Road Traffic Delegation of….

On 28 November 2016, the meeting provided for in article 18, no. 1 of the LFATM was held, in which the witnesses indicated were heard and the Parties produced final oral submissions. The deadline fixed for the rendering of the arbitral decision was set as 13 December 2016.

II - PROCEDURAL PREREQUISITES

5. The Arbitral Tribunal is regularly constituted, is materially competent, and the Parties enjoy legal personality and capacity, being legitimate under articles 4 and 10, no. 2 of the LFATM and article 1 of Order no. 112-A/2011, of 22 March.

The proceedings do not suffer from defects that would invalidate it, and there are no incidents requiring resolution nor preliminary questions upon which the Arbitral Tribunal must pronounce itself, save those resulting from the matter of fact established as proven.

III – THE ARBITRAL CLAIM AND THE RESPECTIVE RESPONSE

6. The Claimant, in the initial petition, to substantiate the request for an arbitral award, essentially alleged the following:

a) The identity of the nature of the taxes, the factual and legal grounds invoked and the competent tribunal makes possible the accumulation of claims, in accordance with article 3 of the LFATM;

b) Through the Customs Delegation of … (CD…), between 2 March and 6 April 2015, it proceeded to submit Vehicle Customs Declaration forms (VCD) for the admission of seven used vehicles, originating from France, which it itemizes;

c) On 11 January 2016, the said delegation sent it notifications for payment, within 10 days, of certain amounts, by way of additional MVT taxation, relating to that group of seven vehicles, determined in a process of revision of the tax act, on the ground that the vehicles, at the time of admission, had been declared with an incorrect fiscal classification;

d) The calculation of these amounts took into account the MVT already paid under the VCD, considering the fiscal classification with which they were declared, of light passenger vehicles, with the reductions inherent to the years of use of the vehicles at the time they were declared or the amounts determined via the use of the valuation method provided for in article 11, no. 3 of the Motor Vehicle Tax Code (MVTC), approved by Law no. 22-A/2007, of 29 June, as the case may be, with the differential - now collected in MVT - being that resulting from the fiscal classification for light commercial vehicles as understood in article 7, no. 2, subparagraph a) of the said code;

e) At the prior hearing stage, it requested that it be provided with the factual and legal reasoning for such decision, since in its understanding the MVT was correctly assessed, the customs delegation having responded that it understood them to be duly substantiated, which it alleges constitutes a procedural defect that cannot be remedied;

f) All vehicles entered national territory accompanied by their respective certificates of conformity with the classification of light passenger vehicle with 5 seats, a situation confirmed during vehicle inspection, as well as during homologation by the IMT, having been duly registered in the Motor Vehicle Registry with 5 seats, whereby there is an erroneous qualification of the tax fact by the Respondent.

It concludes, requesting that the challenge (by lapsus, it referred to complaint) be considered admissible and proven and, consequently, the annulment of the additional MVT assessments be decreed, with the legal consequences.

7. For its part, the Respondent, in response to the initial petition, alleged the following:

a) First, as a preliminary matter, it raised the question of the value of the case, which was indicated as 13,672.50 €, corresponding to the sum of the additional MVT that are being demanded, but which in its view should be 14,132.94 €, incorporating the additional MVT and the respective compensatory interest, this amount being the economic benefit of the claim;

b) On the claim, and more specifically on the facts, it states that in all VCD the Claimant mentioned in the vehicle characteristics that they had five seats and were vehicles of Category 01 and Type 001, codes which refer to light passenger automobiles. The certificates of conformity were also presented, mentioning that the vehicles had a capacity of five seats;

c) Integrated into the proceedings were also the registration certificates, "Certificat d'Immatriculation", in which in the respective capacity it states that they are vehicles with 2 seats and are DERIV/VP (derivative of light passenger vehicle);

d) On the reverse of the Certificates of Approval in Technical Inspection for Registration there is a table regarding the identification of vehicles, which specifically reports the elements contained in the "Registration certificate" and which is composed of fields corresponding to those of the motor vehicle registration certificate, having been entered in field J that they are light passenger vehicles with a capacity of 5 seats;

e) The Model Form 9 of the IMT (request for Registration Certificate), signed and authenticated by the same Vehicle Technical Inspection Centre B… – Motor Vehicle Inspections, SA (B…) was also presented;

f) For all vehicles the application of the valuation method was requested;

g) "A posteriori" it was detected that the vehicles had been declared as light passenger vehicles with 5 seats and the MVT had been assessed in accordance with that fiscal classification, when the French registration certificates stated that they were light passenger vehicles with a capacity of only two seats;

h) In terms of law, the competence for carrying out inspections belongs to the IMT which may resort to entities managing inspection centres, which occurred in the present case, with the Certificate of Technical Inspection for Registration being issued on IMT Model Form 112, on whose reverse there is a table entitled "Registration certificate" of which fields appear that are exactly those composing the motor vehicle registration certificate, approved by Decree-Law no. 178-A/2005, of 28 October, which transposed Directive no. 1999/37/EC of the Council of 29 April, as amended by Directive no. 2003/127/EC of the Commission, of 23 December;

i) There is a discrepancy between the data entered by the inspector from the inspection centre and the content of the registration certificate issued in France, that is, the data entered by the inspector do not correspond to the elements that actually appeared in the French registration certificate, whereby it contests the evidential value of the Inspection Certificate on the grounds of its falsity, in the terms and for the purposes provided for in article 446 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), subsidiarily applicable by virtue of article 29 of the LFATM, asserting its falsity, the opening and processing of which it requested;

j) As grounds for the falsity of the documents it is NOT in question whether the vehicles had or not a capacity of 2 or 5 seats at the moment they were inspected but rather how many seats of capacity appeared in the registration certificate, as this is the fact that was the subject of the perception of the B… inspector, and which is attested by him with the data he enters in the table of the inspection certificate relating to the "registration certificate";

l) Moreover, without conceding, the homologation and classification of the vehicles by the IMT is not binding for tax purposes, as is recognized in various rulings of the Central Administrative Court of the South, which it identifies;

m) The Certificate of Conformity always has at its base the characteristics of the vehicle according to EC homologation, which is not binding for purposes of taxation, any vehicle, in particular, being able to undergo subsequent transformations, often before its introduction into consumption, and that Certificate of Conformity cannot obviously prove the characteristics that a particular vehicle actually has after its departure from the sphere of its respective manufacturer, namely as regards characteristics easily alterable through transformation operations, such as the existence and number of passenger seats;

n) Such conclusion is not invalidated by the fact that in no. 1 of article 4 of the MVTC reference is made, as regards elements composing the tax base of the MVT, to the certificate of conformity, since the only elements referred to there are the cubic capacity, CO2 emissions and particle emission levels, with no reference made to vehicle capacity or other elements that would allow their classification as passenger or commercial vehicles;

o) In view of the content of the norms contained in articles 4 and 5 of the MVTC, for purposes of determining the tax base and the tax event, the legislator, when referring to elements contained in the certificate of conformity, does so in the assumption that the nature and type of vehicles are previously and duly classified/identified in accordance with the foreign registration certificate or equivalent, of origin;

p) The relevance of the certificate of conformity is fundamentally tied, for purposes of taxation, to the measurement of the level of carbon dioxide or the level of particle emissions and to cubic capacity;

q) Notwithstanding the Claimant having declared the vehicle for introduction into consumption as a light passenger vehicle with 5 seats, the truth is that the registration certificate issued in France identified it as a derivative of a light passenger vehicle with 2 seats, such document being authentic, with no need for any recognition procedure in Portugal given that in accordance with article 4 of Directive 1999/37/EC "…the registration certificate issued by a Member State must be recognized by the other Member States either for identification of the vehicle in international circulation or for new registration in another Member State."

The Respondent concludes by requesting that the tax assessment acts now being contested should be maintained and the request for an arbitral award be judged totally inadmissible, as not proven, and it should be absolved of the respective claim.

8. In final oral submissions, the Claimant and the Respondent maintained their initial positions expressed in the initial petition and the respective response.

IV – THE FACTS AND THEIR SUBSTANTIATION

9. In the matter of fact, relevant for the decision to be rendered, this Arbitral Tribunal establishes as proven, in view of the elements in the file, the following facts:

a) The Claimant proceeded to the admission at CD… of a group of seven motor vehicles, which were declared as light passenger vehicles, with the respective amounts being paid in terms of MVT, and subsequent national registration being obtained;

b) The Respondent, months later, proceeded to a revision of the tax acts, for having understood that, in view of the documentation presented to instruct the vehicle admission requests, the vehicles, for tax purposes, had been incorrectly classified, having determined, through order of the head of the … delegation, of 3 November 2015, the collection of the amounts considered in debt.

c) The amounts demanded and additionally collected correspond to the difference between the amounts paid at the time of introduction into consumption, as vehicles admitted under the fiscal classification of light passenger vehicles, and the amounts that should have been collected and paid for taxation of the vehicle admission, while classified as derivative commercial vehicles of light passenger vehicles, plus the respective compensatory interest;

d) The vehicles in the circumstances described in the preceding subparagraphs are the following:

1) – Vehicle of the brand …, model …, with chassis no. VF…, with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-… -…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 02 March 2015, having paid 1,206.73 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/…, of 07.01.2016, for payment of 2,002.07 € in MVT and 68.45 € in compensatory interest.

2) Vehicle of the brand "…", model …, with chassis no. VF…, with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-…-…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 9 March 2015, having paid 976.37 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/…, of 07.01.2016, for payment of 2,577.99 € in MVT and 85.89 € in compensatory interest.

3) Vehicle of the brand "…", model "…", with chassis no. VF…, with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-…-…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 09 March 2015, having paid 1,174.08 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/…, of 07.01.2016, for payment of 1,601.88 € in MVT and 53.54 € in compensatory interest.

4) Vehicle of the brand "…", model "…", with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-…-…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 9 March 2015, having paid 911.74 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/… for payment of 2,163.16 € in MVT and 72.07 € in compensatory interest.

5) Vehicle of the brand "…", model "…", with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-…-…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 06 April 2015, having paid 1,086.21 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/… for payment of 2,122.59 € in MVT and 72.34 € in compensatory interest.

6) Vehicle of the brand "…", model "…", with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-…-…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 12 March 2015, having paid 1,127.31 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/… for payment of 1,306.99 € in MVT and 43.26 € in compensatory interest.

7) Vehicle of the brand "…", model "…", with previous French registration … … …, to which was assigned Portuguese registration …-…-…, through VCD no. 2015/…, of 02 March 2015, having paid 1,177.08 € of MVT.

It was the subject of additional assessment no. 2016/… for payment of 1,897.82 € in MVT and 64.89 € in compensatory interest.

e) All admission processes were instructed with the legally required documentation, having presented, in particular, commercial invoices, certificates of conformity corresponding to the classification of light passenger vehicles M1, with a capacity of 5 seats, including that of the driver, and registration certificates issued by the French authorities, in addition to certificates of approval in technical inspection for registration issued by B…, approving the vehicles for registration purposes;

f) In the registration certificates issued by the French authorities, in terms of characteristics, the vehicles are described as derivatives of light passenger vehicles (DERIVLP), with a capacity of 2 seats, and in the certificates of approval in technical inspection for registration issued by B…, the vehicles, in terms of characteristics, are described as light passenger vehicle, with a capacity of 5 seats;

g) In the said certificates issued by B…, mention was made of the readings taken of the mileage shown on the speedometers of the vehicles indicated below, which are compared with those shown in the respective invoices of sale issued in France:

- Registration …, inspected with 76,143 kilometers and had 150,810 on the invoice;

- Registration …, inspected with 128,141 kilometers and had 132,807 on the invoice;

- Registration …, inspected with 72,442 kilometers and had 147,247 on the invoice;

- Registration …, inspected with 78,952 kilometers and had 155,656 on the invoice;

- Registration …, inspected with 109,783 kilometers and had 109,447 on the invoice;

- Registration …, inspected with 67,362 kilometers and had 137,532 on the invoice;

- Registration …, inspected with 75,149 kilometers and had 128,393 on the invoice.

h) For four of the vehicles, the Claimant requested that taxation be carried out using the valuation method referred to in article 11, no. 3 of the MVTC, with the vehicles, after prior payment of the valuation fee, being submitted to examination of the documentation in order to calculate the amount of MVT to be paid;

i) For purposes of applying the cited valuation method, the Claimant presented to the tax services sale quotations of the vehicles in Portugal contained in specialized magazines, which are compared with the values contained in the respective invoices of sale, presented to instruct the processes:

- Registration …, invoice value of 2,400 € and quotation value of 9,422 €;

- Registration …, invoice value of 5,468.33 € and quotation value of 9,066 €;

- Registration …, invoice value of 3,647.17 € and quotation value of 9,752.00 €;

- Registration …, invoice value of 1,445.83 € and quotation value of 11,226.00 €.

j) For the remaining vehicles, with registrations …, … and …, invoice values of 3,081.17 €, 2,986.83 € and 4,496.17 € were presented, respectively, with the Claimant accepting the provisional assessment, carried out solely on the basis of the reduction in MVT by years of use, referred to in article 11, no. 1 of the MVTC;

l) The vehicles were registered nationally in the category of light passenger vehicles, with a capacity of 5 seats, and were taxed and paid by the Claimant, under the Single Circulation Tax, for the year 2015, in accordance with the said category;

m) In accordance with an order dated 2015.01.26, sent by the competent service of the IMT to the Respondent, any alteration of characteristics of a used vehicle, imported, regarding those appearing in its respective document of identification, is only admitted after assignment of the respective national registration, being in this case an alteration of characteristics of a vehicle with national registration, whereby the IMT does not authorize the transformation of vehicles at a moment prior to their fiscal regularization in national territory.

10. There are no facts established as not proven of relevance for the taking of a decision.

11. The facts were established as proven having regard to the documents brought to the proceedings by the Claimant, embodied in the initial petition and in the annexes accompanying it, as well as in the response and in the administrative file sent by the Respondent, and in the testimonial evidence produced at the meeting referred to in article 18 of the LFATM.

V - SUBSTANTIATION

12. In light of what has been set out, the Arbitral Tribunal considers that a response should be found to the following disputed legal questions:

a) Value of the case for purposes of the arbitral proceedings;

b) Relevance of the documentation legally established in the admission of used vehicles from other Member States (MS) of the European Union (EU), for purposes of establishing objective scope and application of the various tax tables, referred to in articles 2 and 7, 8 and 9 of the MVTC and of the respective tax event.

c) Legitimacy for the Respondent to assert falsity of the Certificates of Approval in Technical Inspection for Registration issued by B….

a) Value of the case

13. The Respondent contests the value of the case attributed by the Claimant, which was indicated as 13,672.50 € when it should have been 14,132.94 €.

In accordance with article 97-A, no. 1 subparagraph a) of the TPPC, as regards the value of the case, the acceptable values, for purposes of costs or others provided for by law, for actions proceeding in tax courts, when an assessment is being contested, are the amount of the importance whose annulment is sought.

Now, it is found that the Claimant limited itself to adding up the values of the assessments being contested in terms of MVT without taking into account that, in parallel, the Respondent, by reason of it being a "posterior" collection, also assessed compensatory interest.

The assessments made by the Respondent, although reporting different receipt codes, aggregate the debt in terms of MVT and compensatory interest.

Compensatory interest is due when, by a fact attributable to the taxpayer, the assessment of part or all of the tax owed is delayed, and they are incorporated into the tax debt itself, with which they are jointly assessed, as emerges from article 35, nos. 1 and 8 of the LGT.

Thus, to the 13,672.50 € of the MVT debt there must be added 460.44 € as compensatory interest, totaling 14,132.94 €, a value which the Arbitral Tribunal considers as the value of the case.

b) Relevance of the documentation legally established in the admission of used vehicles from other MS of the EU, for purposes of establishing objective scope and application of the various tax tables and the establishment of the respective tax event

14. To determine the meaning and scope of articles 2 and 7, 8 and 9 of the MVTC it is important to take into account the provisions of article 9 of the Civil Code (CC) which, for purposes of the interpretation of law, provides that the interpreter should not limit itself to the letter of the law, but reconstruct from the texts the legislative intent, taking especially into account the unity of the legal system, the circumstances in which the law was elaborated and the specific conditions of the time in which it is applied.

It further requires that the legislative intent cannot be considered by the interpreter unless it has in the law a minimum of verbal correspondence, even if imperfectly expressed, and in fixing the meaning and scope of the law one should presume that the legislator adopted the most correct solutions and knew how to express its intent in adequate terms.

Resort to this article 9 of the CC is a specific requirement of article 11, no. 1 of the LGT itself, according to which, in determining the meaning of tax norms and in qualifying the facts to which they apply, the general rules and principles of interpretation and application of laws are observed.

15. The admission of used vehicles by individuals, or even by registered or recognized operators, is regulated in article 20, nos. 1 and 2 of the MVTC, and requires the presentation to customs services of a VCD, instructed with the following documents:

- Foreign registration certificate or equivalent document;

- Commercial invoice or declaration of sale in the case of acquisition from a private party;

- Certificate of conformity;

- Transport document and respective receipt of payment whenever the vehicle does not enter national territory by its own means;

- Document proving the actual measurement of the level of carbon dioxide emission by a legally authorized technical centre, whenever such element does not appear in the respective certificate of conformity.

16. In the context of the VCD, all these elements have a function, which is to allow the customs official to verify the said Declaration, confirming the accuracy of the elements entered therein by the respective "importer" of the vehicle. Thus:

a) the foreign registration certificate or an equivalent document allows the identification of the previous owner of the vehicle and verification of the legitimacy of the company or individual in issuing a commercial invoice or declaration of sale, to know the registration and its nature, as well as the date of issue in the country of origin, in order to enable, prior to admission, consultations with European databases of stolen vehicles and to allow the calculation of MVT based on its age, and to know the main characteristics of the vehicle and the regularity of its life cycle through periodic inspections;

b) the commercial invoice allows identification of the intra-community transaction underlying and the financial flows generated or, in the case of acquisition from a private party, the declaration of sale combined with the registration certificate allows certification of the legitimacy of the person selling the vehicle;

c) the certificate of conformity, as emerges from Annex IX of Directive no. 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, in the version approved by Regulation (EC) no. 385/2009 of the Commission, is a declaration issued by the manufacturer of the vehicle to the buyer, whose purpose is to ensure that the vehicle complies with the legislation in force in the EU at the date it was produced, also serving for the competent authorities of the MS to be able to register vehicles without having to require the interested parties to submit complementary technical documentation. It must include the vehicle identification number and its exact technical characteristics, which are the source of privileged information for the authorities of the MS to proceed to the issue of the first registration certificate for new vehicles, satisfying the provisions of Directive no. 1999/37/EC of the Council, of 29 April 1999, as regards registration certificates.

The certificate of conformity is comprised of two parts, the "face", Side 1 which consists of a declaration of conformity from the manufacturer, and the "reverse" Side 2 which is a technical description of the main characteristics of the vehicle.

On Side 2, for vehicles of category M1 (complete and completed light passenger vehicles) there is a requirement for identification of the general construction characteristics as regards the body, the main dimensions, the masses ("weights"), the propulsion device and environmental performance.

It is in this context that they mention data fundamental for the generality of taxation which, in the Portuguese case, passes through the reference to gross weight, cubic capacity, CO2 emissions and particle emissions.

Specifically with respect to the body, in addition to the body code, the number of seats (including that of the driver) is required.

d) the transport document and respective receipt of payment whenever the vehicle does not enter national territory by its own means, has as its main function to prove the date of entry of the vehicles into national territory and to make difficult irregular stays susceptible to increasing the time of years of use of the vehicle at the moment the VCD is presented, with the consequent fiscal relief.

e) the document proving the actual measurement of the level of carbon dioxide emission by a legally authorized technical centre whenever such element does not appear in the respective certificate of conformity, in consonance with the provisions of nos. 2 and 3 of article 4 of Law no. 22-A/2007, aims to allow the calculation of the MVT to be paid, regarding the CO2 component, in more specific cases, of vehicles with greater age.

17. Article 4 of the MVTC stresses the importance of the certificate of conformity in determining the tax base, in the following terms:

"1 - The motor vehicle tax has a specific nature, with its tax base being constituted by the following elements, as contained in the respective certificate of conformity:

a) As to passenger, commercial and mixed-use automobiles, taxed under table A, the cubic capacity, the level of carbon dioxide (CO2) emission relating to the combined test cycle and the level of particle emissions, when applicable; (Amended by Law no. 83-C/2013, of 31 December).

b) As to light commercial and mixed-use automobiles, taxed under table B, the cubic capacity and the level of particle emissions, when applicable; (Amended by Law no. 83-C/2013, of 31 December).

c) As to vehicles manufactured before 1970, motorcycles, tricycles, quadricycles and motorhomes, the cubic capacity. (Addition by Law no. 83-C/2013, of 31 December).

2 - When vehicles subject to taxation in function of the level of carbon dioxide emission do not include this element in the certificate of conformity, the emissions to be considered as tax base are those resulting from actual measurement to be carried out by a legally authorized technical centre.

3 - ….

4 - ….".

18. In the sphere of the previous legislation, Decree-Law no. 40/93, of 18 February, the instruction of the processes of admission of used vehicles was governed by the provisions of article 17, no. 4, according to which, in addition to the submission of a light vehicle declaration (LVD), the invoice, the taxpayer card, the log book and property registration title and community or national reception, if it already existed, were required.

Community reception was made through the certificate of conformity, a document issued by the vehicle manufacturer, which had a homologation number built in a standardized manner, namely a letter to indicate whether it was a European homologation, a number corresponding to the country issuing the homologation, the number of the directive supporting the homologation, plus six more digits, four for the homologation number and two more for its extension, all separated with asterisks.

For computer reasons related to the issuance of the then log books, all European homologations resulted in a national homologation, which was constituted by eleven numbers, revealing the year, the code of the issuing service, the sequential number and computer control, with the last three digits respecting extensions of national homologations.

The link of the homologation to the LVD was made only for the customs services to confirm the cubic capacity and gross weights that were declared, since they were the only reference measures for purposes of taxation, whether to calculate the tax or to allow its classification, as categories of vehicles to be taxed.

19. With the publication of the MVTC and also of the Single Vehicle Registration Code, more information of a technical nature began to be required, namely those of an environmental character, both as regards CO2 emissions in combined test cycle and as regards particle emissions.

Accordingly, the data contained in the certificates of conformity issued by manufacturers became imperative and received express legal provision, in terms of tax bases, in order, in function of tables A, B and C, of articles 7 and 10 of the MVTC, the Respondent to proceed to the respective tax assessments.

This rule does not exclude, however, that the Respondent, in very specific circumstances, cannot resort to elements different from those contained in the certificate of conformity, since in accordance with article 5, no. 2, subparagraph b) of the MVTC, the tax event is the alteration of the engine which results in an increase in cubic capacity or in carbon dioxide or particle emissions.

20. Regarding the other elements of a technical nature necessary for the Respondent to proceed with the assessments of the MVT, there is no explicit legal basis for such information to be gathered, however, it must be in the certificates of conformity that the majority of this information necessary for taxation will be found, such as the fuel used for propulsion, the gross weight, the number of seats and the existence of four-wheel drive.

For this reason, when the national homologation number is triggered, which is based on the certificate of conformity, in terms of the computer system all these fields of the VCD are automatically filled, as they correspond to elements of information attested by whoever has the authority to be able to effect them, that is, the respective manufacturer.

21. Although article 6 of Directive no. 92/53/EEC of the Council, of 18 June 1992, establishes that MS may for purposes of taxation or registration of vehicles request that elements not mentioned in Annex IX of Directive no. 2007/46/EC be added to the certificate provided such elements are explicitly mentioned in the reception file or can be determined from it through simple calculations, or can be completed in order to give greater relevance to the data necessary and sufficient for purposes of taxation and registration of vehicles by the competent national authorities, this type of provision has solely to do with the admission of new vehicles. If the tax system of a certain country contemplates certain elements of a technical nature that are not reflected in the certificates of conformity commonly issued, the manufacturer can be alerted so that the certificates of conformity of vehicles they manufacture destined for that country contain such informational element.

22. However, taxation in the field of MVT does not have as its sole foundation the data contained in the certificates of conformity. In some cases, the assessment of the tax implies direct perceptions by the services of the tax authority, which will have to ensure the carrying out of measurements of its own of certain interior dimensions of the vehicles, analysis of technical catalogues of the automobiles, examination of the documentation that is presented to instruct the vehicle admissions and request of other elements proving what is declared.

Such is the case with light commercial vehicles, closed box, with capacity up to 3 seats, whose MVT rates vary according to whether the interior height of the cargo box is greater or less than 120 cm, as per article 7, no. 2 of the MVTC, and light mixed-use automobiles which, cumulatively, present gross weight greater than 2,300 kg, minimum length of the cargo box of 145 cm, minimum interior height of the cargo box of 130 cm, measured from the respective floor, which must be continuous, immovable bulkhead, parallel to the last row of seats, which completely separates the space intended for the driver and passengers from that intended for goods, and which do not present four-wheel drive, permanent or adaptable, as per article 9, no. 1, a) of the MVTC.

The same applies to motor vehicles that are susceptible of adaptation of four-wheel drive.

Although the French terminology "DERIV VP" which appears in the French registration certificates does not appear in the current Portuguese legislative lexicon, until the publication of the MVTC there was a specific definition in fiscal legislation, of light commercial vehicles derived from light passenger vehicles, as per article 2 of DL 40/93 of 18 February, as amended by Law no. 109-B/2001, of 27 December, which were known in the market as derivatives or "vans".

23. The issuance of the first registration certificate reports a basic technical reality, based on the certificate of conformity which, however, is susceptible of modifications, through a process of control by the competent authorities in matters of road traffic control.

In the case of the file, the analysis of the registration certificates issued by the French authorities reveals that all the vehicles, although they were conceived and produced by the manufacturer on platforms and according to the prescriptions of light passenger vehicles and as such approved, that is, according to Annex II of Directive no. 92/53/EEC of the Council, are vehicles of category M1, when registered for the first time in France they were previously subject to a transformation operation, normally with the elimination of the rear seat and the fixing of a bulkhead immediately behind the backrests of the front seats, which led to them being the subject of a reduction in the number of homologated seats, from five to two seats.

With this technical operation, the said vehicles underwent an increase in the space intended for the luggage compartment, having become apt, in addition to continuing to provide for the transport of the driver and of a possible helper, for the transport of small-dimension merchandise, which, in fiscal terms, leads to such vehicles being classified as vehicles derived from light passenger vehicles.

This type of operation is justified in order to enable the automobile market to offer a range of vehicles called utility vehicles, quite sought after in terms of the said transport of small-dimension merchandise, but also by the sector of provision of assistance and localized support services, as it combines the mobility offered in the provision of services with the satisfaction of its own needs for personal transport.

These alterations were made to appear in the registration certificate issued by the French authorities where the vehicles came to have two seats and to have a mention of vehicles derived from light passenger vehicles and to be used with the new functional capacities.

24. At the moment of the sale of the vehicles from France to Portugal, the registration certificates and the invoices are explicit as to the characteristics that the vehicles possessed, that is, they were vehicles that had been subject to a transformation in functional terms and were being sold in the state in which they were found.

However, in the case of the vehicles in the file, all of them presented themselves for inspection on national territory, with a view to the assignment of national registration, with characteristics different from those mentioned in the registration certificates of which they were holders, namely with respect to the number of seats, which went from 2 to 5, that is, a transformation occurred that altered certain functional categories.

Apparently, between the sale of the vehicles in France and their presentation at B…, there occurred a restoration to a situation in conformity with that contained in the certificate of conformity.

This is an operation that can induce risk for road safety, given that although it is merely a matter of placing the disappeared seats, screwing or welding the structure and placing safety belts, it is an operation that must respect safety aspects and, therefore, must be carried out by a qualified professional, who must issue a certificate.

25. For the inspection act it is necessary that the interested parties, in addition to the vehicle itself, present the unique document of the automobile or the registration certificate, with invoices of acquisition or the force of insurance being dispensed with.

B…, acting in representation of the IMT, issued the certificates of approval in technical inspection for registration.

Indeed, the services of B… inspected the vehicles and, in addition to classifying them within the category and type of light passenger vehicle, recorded that they had a certain mileage.

What was requested by the importer from B… was a certification of approval in technical inspection for national registration and not an alteration of the characteristics.

In that respect the registration certification states that the vehicle was approved and the data intended for the issue of the registration certificate are those on the reverse, that is, those corresponding to the completion of the respective registration certificate.

26. Within the scope of the IMT, transformations that imply alteration of the regulatory characteristics of vehicles, namely as regards their elements of identification or classification, which alter systems of components or accessories subject to homologation or may constitute a risk for road safety, can only be carried out with prior authorization of that same institute.

In technical terms, transformation is any alteration of the structure, body, engine, systems or components, of a vehicle registered under an approved model.

- On the autonomy of the fiscal classification of vehicles as against the road technical classification

27. With the exception of motorcycles, tricycles and quadricycles, which are defined in the same terms as the Road Code (RC), regarding the other vehicles, and although there are some similarities in the delimitation of the respective categories of automobiles, there is no coincidence between the fiscal classification of vehicles and the road technical classification, as contained in the RC, since the former continue to privilege categories with differentiated functional aspects.

This is an objective legal reality which the jurisprudence has recognized, and which the Respondent echoes in its response. The rulings it mentions from the Administrative Court of the South, in proceedings nos. 1133/06, of 28.03.2007, 1309/06, of 17.04.07, and 7395/14 of 05.03.2015 are illustrative of the technical and fiscal dichotomy.

According to article 106 of the RC, light automobiles are defined as vehicles with gross weight equal to or less than 3,500 kg, with capacity not exceeding 9 seats. Depending on their use, only two types are considered, that of passengers which is intended for the transport of persons and that of merchandise which is intended for the transport of cargo.

Now, the fiscal classification of vehicles is considerably more complex, in that it seeks to find in the technical characteristics grounds to tax differently vehicles, in the light of economic and environmental criteria.

Thus, in accordance with article no. 2 of the MVTC, as regards objective scope, light passenger automobiles are considered those which, having gross weight up to 3,500 kg and with capacity not exceeding nine seats, including that of the driver, are intended for the transport of persons.

Light mixed-use automobiles are those which, having gross weight up to 3,500 kg and with capacity not exceeding nine seats, including that of the driver, are intended for the transport, alternating or simultaneous, of persons and cargo;

Finally, light commercial automobiles are those vehicles which: either possess an open box, or present themselves without a box or possess a closed box that does not present an integrated cabin in the body, with gross weight of 3,500 kg, without four-wheel drive;

28. The complexity is revealed essentially in the rates to which each vehicle ends up being subject, given that these have to do with the specific technical characteristics of each vehicle within each category.

The MVT is an internal tax, in which the Portuguese authorities have autonomy to delineate the objective and subjective scope, the tax bases, the rates, the forms of collection, etc., not being able, however, to put in question the principles arising from article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as regards taxation.

For a tax with the characteristics of MVT, it is understood that instrumental use of the data contained in the certificate of conformity and the registration certificate can and should be made, but subordinated to a technical customs control, which ensures the accuracy of the tax event in the admission of taxable vehicles.

29. In view of the documents that were presented to the Customs Delegation for purposes of fiscal regularization of the vehicles, it is found that it had sufficient information and conditions to proceed to the correct assessment of the MVT owed.

Indeed, in accordance with article 5, no. 1 of the MVTC, the tax event is constituted by the manufacture, assembly, admission or importation of taxable vehicles into national territory, …", with "Admission" defined as "the entry of a vehicle originating or in free circulation in another Member State of the European Union into national territory.", in consonance with the provisions of no. 3, subparagraph a) of the same article. This tax, however, only becomes payable at the moment of presentation of the VCD, as per article 6, 1, subparagraph b) of the same MVTC.

30. In view of the discrepancy that existed between the information contained in the invoice and the registration certificate as regards the number of seats and what was declared in the VCD, supported by the inspection certificate issued by B…, it was imperative that the Respondent ascertain the reasons for such discrepancy, in particular, even calling the vehicle itself for physical verification in the customs premises and determining where and when the vehicle had altered its number of seats appearing in the registration certificate, given the importance of the moment of entry into national territory of the vehicle.

31. It happens that the Claimant, in four of the seven admissions under consideration, not having agreed with the provisional assessment of the MVT that was applied to it by the application of the reductions in function of the years of use contained in Table D, of article 11, no. 1 of the MVTC, requested, for purposes of calculation of the tax, that the vehicle be subject to application of the formula provided for in no. 3 of the same article 11, which is regulated by order.

The said Order no. 44/2001, of 26 January, updated by 297/2013, of 4 October, makes available to the Respondent the option of, and for the said purpose, opting for one of two modalities:

- in the first case, it proceeds to the valuation of the vehicle based exclusively on the analysis of information contained in documents referring to specialized publications of the sector, with the requesting party paying the amount of 200 euros in its favor, by way of fee.

- in the second case, the valuation is made on the basis of the analysis of information contained in documents referring to specialized publications of the sector but also and simultaneously through recourse to physical verification of the vehicle, giving rise to payment of the sum of 300 euros, equally in favor of the Respondent.

In the scope of the application of the regulation in question, it had the express faculty of having been able to require the presentation of the vehicles for purposes of physical verification in the customs premises, so that the said vehicles, when they were introduced into consumption and would be registered, would have been correctly taxed. Indeed, the requests are made on forms in which the importer itself requests that it be notified of the day, hour and place in which the vehicle must be presented for purposes of valuation.

The doubts about the moment in which the said transformation was carried out of assembly of the rear seat, with the consequent alteration of the number of seats, from two to five, in particular determining whether it occurred before or after the tax event occurred, should have been clarified, through the requirement of the respective proofs, such as the invoice of the respective rendering of service in the country where it was carried out, or by the importer's own term of responsibility or warranty certification.

Faced with a possible lack of collaboration as referred to in article 59, no. 4 of the General Tax Law (GTL) and article 48, no. 2 of the TPPC, the Respondent, at the limit, could have blocked the fiscal regularization procedure until it was presented with documents proving that the tax event had occurred outside national territory, prior to admission, and even resorted to an inspection as provided for in article 63, no. 1 subparagraph b) of the same GTL, since it is its responsibility to carry out all necessary diligence for the satisfaction of the public interest and the discovery of the material truth, without being subordinated to the initiative of the author of the request, as provided by article 58 of the GTL.

32. Now what happened is that the Respondent selected the less demanding option, based on merely documentary analysis and dispensed with the presentation of the vehicles.

It must be underscored the perfectly uncritical manner in which the processes of introduction into consumption of the vehicles in question were accepted and processed by the Respondent, which allowed their registration based on merely formal control.

It is not merely the question of the divergence in the number of seats and the fiscal classification contained in the French registration certificates relative to what was declared in the VCD and attested in the inspection certificate issued by B… having gone unnoticed.

The documentation delivered by the importer, now Claimant, revealed important incongruities that it was imperative from the start to ascertain. Indeed, in six of the admissions in question, there was a manifest divergence between the number of kilometers mentioned in the invoices of sale from the French seller and the number of kilometers entered in the VCD and also made to appear in the respective inspection certificate.

The mileages indicated in the invoices of sale are compatible, having in mind the years of use of each vehicle, with intensive uses in business activities, characteristics of the type of use given to these vehicles.

However, by not being entered in the VCD, but rather others of reduced mileage, at least in four of the cases, for purposes of calculation of the MVT through the valuation method provided for in article 11, no. 3 of the MVTC, they had a decisive influence on the value of the vehicle and its respective tax calculation by the Respondent, moreover in a manner unfavorable to the Claimant, given that, for such reason, a value corresponding to a moderately used vehicle in its years of use was obtained, rather than a value corresponding to an intensely used vehicle and closer to its end of useful life.

Another matter to be noted is that, the Claimant having opted for the valuation method with respect to those four vehicles, and presented documents with the values of sale in Portugal of the light passenger vehicles in question, recognized by an entity reputable in the matter of providing quotations of vehicles, the Respondent did not find it strange the reduced sale values of the vehicles in France when compared with the said quotations in Portugal, not because those sale values were commercially inaccurate, but because they corresponded to vehicles that had been used by vehicle rental companies without drivers, which by having been normally subject to intense wear, had a greater commercial depreciation compatible with the years of use and with the mileages completed.

In one case this difference is abysmal as the vehicle was acquired in France for 1,445.83 € and the Claimant presented a proof of price quotation of sale in Portugal endorsed by a company specialized in the matter of 11,226.00 €, whereby it would be the case to say that when the alms is great the poor should be suspicious.

The fluctuations in quotation that normally exist in terms of the automobile market of each country could never justify such significant changes as those that occurred.

The truth is that, through the deficient appraisal of the elements placed at the disposal of the Respondent by the importer, now Claimant, such did not occur, which would have been susceptible of having led to an incorrect collection of the tax.

33. The Arbitral Tribunal considers that the additional assessment to which the Respondent resorted to correct an error of its services, as emerges from the revision process provided for by article 78 of the GTL, is insufficiently substantiated. Since confirmation of the number of seats declared in the VCD, through physical verifications of the vehicles, was not carried out at the time of customs clearance of the vehicle, such information being contrary to that existing in the registration certificates, it was imperative that the processes of "posterior" collection were not founded solely on the mere documentary finding not detected at the time, but had ascertained the moment of entry of the vehicles into national territory, which can be known in approximate terms, from the transport document and its receipt of payment, but above all had ascertained the circumstances in terms of time and place where the respective transformation occurred, it being relevant by comparison with the tax event.

Indeed, unless the fiscal legislator derogated the tax event for vehicles that undergo transformations, in the sense of only accepting the technical elements contained in the foreign certificate of which they are holders, establishing a true legal presumption, somewhat similar to that established in article 22, no. 2 of the MVTC, for vehicles with provisional registrations, it is not seen that, in the specific case, a physical verification of the vehicle could not have failed to be required.

Thus, by insufficiency of proof, the Arbitral Tribunal does not establish as proven that the tax event of the additional tax occurred in national territory.

c) Legitimacy for the assertion of falsity of Certificate of Approval in Technical Inspection for Registration issued by a motor vehicle inspection centre.

34. The Respondent asserted the falsity of the content of the inspection certificate, for in its understanding, the elements of identification of the vehicle contained in the registration certificate do not correspond to the truth of the facts, that is, do not correspond to the elements that actually appeared in the French registration certificate, whereby it contests the evidential value of that document on the grounds of its falsity.

Article 371 of the Civil Code (CC) states that authentic documents make full proof of the facts they refer to as practiced by the respective authority or public official, as well as of the facts that are attested in it on the basis of the perceptions of the documenting entity.

The document is false, when it attests as having been the subject of the perception of the authority or public official any fact that in reality did not occur, or as having been practiced by the responsible entity any act that in reality it was not. – 372, no. 2 of the CC.

Although for a specific framing, in terms of proof, article 390 of the CC establishes that proof by inspection aims at the direct perception of facts by the tribunal, with its result being freely appraisable by the tribunal.

35. The Arbitral Tribunal does not consider that the certificates issued by B… are tainted by falsity and as such should be subject to the procedures provided for in article 446 of the CPC.

The inspection certificates were issued by persons specially qualified with a strictly road purpose, which was not put in question, as can be seen from the examination of the vehicle registration assignment processes, by the authority that could do so, which was the IMT.

In this matter, the Interpretive Communication of the EC regarding procedures for registration of motor vehicles, provides (at most) three stages for obtaining registration of a motor vehicle in the destination MS, and establishes the intervention of road authorities, or of entities in which such procedures are delegated, which clarifies in the following terms:

- the homologation of the technical characteristics of the motor vehicle, which in most cases corresponds to EC homologation.

- technical control of used vehicles, whose objective is to verify, with the aim of protecting the health and life of persons, whether a given motor vehicle is really in good state of maintenance at the date of registration.

- the registration of the motor vehicle, that is, the administrative authorization for the entry of the vehicle into road circulation, which implies its identification and the issuance of a registration number.

36. Specifically regarding the technical control of used vehicles, it clarifies that its objective is to verify whether a given motor vehicle is really in good state of maintenance at the date of registration. Notwithstanding, the fact that a motor vehicle has been used on the public road since the last technical control can justify a technical control at the time of registration in another MS.

According to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, MS can require that motor vehicles registered in the same or another Member state be subject to technical control before being registered, provided this inspection is mandatory for any transfer of ownership of any similar motor vehicle or for any change of holder of the registration certificate, regardless of whether the motor vehicle has been registered in the same or another MS.

Technical controls must, at a minimum, comply with the same procedural conditions as homologation of the technical characteristics of the motor vehicle, namely, be founded on objective, non-discriminatory criteria known in advance, so as to frame the exercise of the power of appraisal of the national authorities, so that this is not used in an arbitrary manner.

Now what is found is that the concern of the inspectors in the inspection they carried out on the vehicles could not go beyond verifying whether a given motor vehicle is really in good state of maintenance at the date of registration, with a view to the protection of the health and life of persons, and this was verified and attested by the participants in the act.

37. Unless the legislator had expressly established it, it is understood that it does not follow that the completion of the respective certificate of approval in technical inspection for registration must necessarily be completed with the elements contained in the preceding registration certificate, given that the inspection consisted of all the examinations, tests and verifications and observations corresponding to a periodic inspection, to a visual observation relating to the identification of the vehicle and its exterior, in a detailed manner.

The act would cease to be an inspective act to transform itself into a mere verification of conformity of the information contained in the French registration certificate with the vehicle, when the purpose does not appear to have been that.

Whereby the Arbitral Tribunal has nothing to point to regarding the legality of the documents that were issued by the said inspection centre and as such does not accept the pretension of the respondent to assert their falsity.

The issuance of the said document does not have fiscal purposes and it is not up to the Respondent to draw consequences where the competent entity that superintends the functioning of the said inspection centres and in the issuance of the said documents did not draw them.

The article itself 20, no. 2, of the MVTC, as regards documents that must instruct the requests for fiscal regularization of vehicles, is silent as to the presentation of the said document.

In the context of customs clearance of used vehicles, as soon as the payment of the tax occurs, through the computer link existing between the Respondent and the IMT, on that same day the respective national registration is assigned. The said inspection document is important, only in the strict measure in which, once registration is obtained, the vehicle is in conditions, even without a registration certificate issued, to be able to begin to be used and to circulate legally for the period of 60 days counted from that assignment, as emerges from article 22, no. 4 of the MVTC, being from the beginning ensured that the respective road circulation in national territory is carried out in safety.

The Respondent thus lacks legitimacy to request the falsity of the issuance of the said certificates of approval in technical inspection for registration, given that the information contained therein does not relate to the prosecution of its duties. The law grants it the proper instrumental means, in particular the certificate of conformity, the registration certificate and the invoice, as well as the inspection action itself, so that it proceeds to the assessment of the taxes that are owed in a correct manner, without it being necessary to make use of the additional information produced in the inspection centres, which aims essentially to ensure road safety.

38. Naturally, there is a question to be resolved within the scope of the IMT, but which only indirectly has fiscal interest and contends with the present file.

The IMT's position is that any alteration of characteristics of an imported used vehicle regarding those appearing in its respective document of identification is only admitted after assignment of the respective national registration, being in this case an alteration of characteristics of a vehicle with national registration, whereby the IMT does not authorize the transformation of vehicles at a moment prior to their fiscal regularization in national territory.

However, in the specific case, it is found that B…, in representation of the IMT itself, proceeded to a certification of approval in technical inspection for registration and certified that the vehicles possessed the characteristics indicated and that they were in conditions to circulate in safety. It also noted that in the inspection the vehicles presented a specific number of kilometers in their respective odometer, not having, however, conditions to perceive or suspect that the mileage it reported for the certificates was presumedly tampered with, since it did not have access to the invoices, the attachment of which is not mandatory.

It omitted, however, relevant data, given that it should have proceeded to a notation on the existence of alteration of characteristics in relation to what appeared in the French registration certificate, as emerges from article 5, no. 3 of Decree-Law no. 144/2012, of 11 July, as regards inspection procedures.

39. For its part, from the analysis of the homologation processes sent to this Arbitral Tribunal by the District Road Traffic Delegation of …, it is possible to note the existence, of the certificates of approval of the technical inspections for registration issued by B…, but also copy of the very invoices issued by the French sellers, which were also presented to instruct the processes of fiscal regularization.

Despite the existence of evident anomalies, both in the invoices of sale as regards the indication of the number of seats and the mileages of the vehicles as in the French registration certificates, relative to the information contained in the certificates issued by B…, apparently, the verification of the processes in that delegation detected nothing and, therefore, there was no initiative to correct them, through the correction of the classification of the vehicles, at least in that phase, with support from the registration of the national homologation corresponding to the category of light commercial vehicles.

40. Given that the vehicles were admitted by a company dedicated to their resale, the IMT, when it had this information, as well as the very French registration certificates, and upon not taking it into account, allowed vehicles with misleading characteristics for the final consumer to enter the commercial circuit, that is, the purchasers of the vehicles, bought vehicles without suspecting that their mileage had been altered and that by reason of having been used as vehicles of merchandise derived from light passenger vehicles they had undergone much greater wear than the use of an ordinary passenger vehicle.

Now the question of the mileage of the vehicles is a very sensitive question in the trust that motorists and people in general must place in the institutions entrusted with ensuring road safety. In practical terms, vehicles with presumedly tampered mileages entered into circulation, revealing kilometers traveled much less than those that the vehicles actually possessed.

All indicates, as the Claimant mentions in its petition, that the vehicles were duly registered in the registry as light passenger vehicles with 5 seats, and are classified as light passenger vehicles.

VI - PROCEDURAL COSTS

41. The provisions of articles 22, no. 4 of the LFATM, and 4, no. 4 of the Regulation of Costs in Tax Arbitration Proceedings, (RCPAT) provide that in the arbitral decision appears the fixing of the amount and the apportionment among the parties of the costs directly resulting from the arbitral proceedings.

VII - DECISION

In these terms, the Sole Arbitral Tribunal decides as follows:

1) To judge the request for an arbitral award admissible with the consequent annulment of the acts of additional assessment of MVT identified in 9 d), determined by the order of 3 November 2015.

2) To dismiss the challenge to the evidential value of an authentic document, embodied in the inspection certificate for assignment of registration, for lack of legitimacy of the Respondent.

3) To condemn the Respondent to the payment of arbitral costs.

In accordance with the provisions of article 97-A of the TPPC, applicable by virtue of the provisions of article 29, no. 1, subparagraphs a) and b) of the LFATM and article 3, no. 2 of the RCPAT, the value of the proceedings is fixed at € 14,132.94 (fourteen thousand one hundred and thirty-two euros and ninety-four cents), an amount corresponding to the sum of the contested assessments whose annulment was requested.

In accordance with Table I appended to the RCPAT, applicable by referral of its article 4, no. 1, the costs are fixed at the value of € 918 (nine hundred and eighteen euros), to be paid by the Respondent.

Notify.

Lisbon, 12 December 2016.

The Sole Arbitrator

António Manuel Melo Gonçalves