CTA Case No. 3371 (Decision)
ttEPUBLIC 0 ; )URT 0 .. PAPER INDUSTRIES CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES PICOP) , Pe titioner , - versus - C. T. A. CASE NO . 3371 THE COMMI SSIONER OF CUSTOMS , Respondent . X- - .- - .- .- .- - .x DE C I S I 0 N The pr ecise issue i n this action to enforce a c l aim for r efund of alleged overpa id cu stoms duties is noth ing more than whethe r or not the impos i t ion thereof i s in accord with the pe rtinent provisions of t he Decree as im- plemented , quoted as f ollows: "Section 1. Al l i mpor t a tions which are at present totally or partially exemp t from customs dut i es and/ o r i nternal revenue taxes under the provisions of any general or speci al la shal l be subj ect to a five (5%) per c en t internal r evenu e t ax subj ect t o the "same i- mitations and conditions prescribed under such law, if any . "In case of i mpor tation s enjoying par ti al exemp ti on s the s~id duty and t ax shall be i mposed on the exemp t portion, i n add it i on to t he du t y and tax on t he t axable portion. "The duty a nd tax i mpos ed here i n sh a 1 �be c ompu t ed in accorda nce wi t h the app l icable provis ions of the Ta rif f and C_stoms Code o f the Philippines a s amended 0 an t he a ti onal ntern~ evenue Code of 1977 as amended , respe ti ely . " (Pres iden tia DeGree o . 1 395, May 31, 1 978 ) . 245
DEC I SI ON - CTA CAS E NO. 3371 - 2- I mplementi ng Departmen t Orde No . 1 3-78 dated J une 7, 1978 , t o the e x t en a ppl i c a ble prov i des : 1' 2. The fi ve per cent customs dut y shal be based on the home consump t ion va l ue o f t he imported a rticles as dete r mined under Section 201 of th e Ta r i f f and Cus~om s Code of the Phi li pp i nes , a s amended , x x x . " 3 . The f ive pe r c ent i n t e rna l revenue t ax s hall be l evied , assessed and col l c ted i acc or dance with the pert i nen provi s i ons of t he Na t i ona l I n t e r na l Revenue Code , as amended ." As it a ppears , pet i tione r, a r eg i s ter ed pioneer e n ter - . pri s e und e r . A. No . 5186 (I nve stmen t I nc ent i ves Act ) . e n joys a par t i a l duty a nd tax e xempt ion on i mpor t a tions t o t he extent o f 75% f or the years 1979 a nd 1960 . Pr e - s i den ti a l Decree No . 139 5 , supra , subjec ted a ny s uch pr i vileged e n terpr i s es accorded f ull or parti a l exemp t ions t o add i t iona l 5% c us toms duty a nd 5%. i nter na l r evenue t ax on t he e xemp t por t i on . Pur suan t t her efor , t he Collector of 'Cus t oms of t he port o f Bi slig a ssessed and col l ec ted t he add i t ional lev i e s on t he va r i ous i mpor t ations f or t he pe r i od i n quest i on wh i ch pe titioner paid , but ~o te s te d t he paymen t of t he cor r e s ponding c ustoms duti e s al l eged to have been e rroneou s l y based on t he i' to tal l anded c o s t " plus ma rk - up a nd no on t he " home c onsumption val ue ", f orma l i zed i n' Bi s1 i g Protes t Nos .lS- 79; 16- 79; '-7-7~; 1~-79 ; 19-79;. 2 2- 7 9~ 23- 79 ; 1 - ~ 0; 5- 80 ; 10 -~ 0 ; 11- ~ 0 and l37 ~o . The Col ec t o of Cus t om dismisse t he p otes s i n ecisions dated Dec embe 27 a nd 28 , 1979 , a nd Febr uar y S a nd ay 5 , 246
DECISION - CTA CASE NO, 337 - 3- ' 1 980 . On appea l, unde r Consolidate Cu stoms Case os . 80 - 0.5 ; 80 - 1.0 ; and 31- 6.0 , r esponden t Commissioner of Cus t oms sustai ned the Collec t or ' s. i n a dec i s i on r ender ed on Oc tober 14, 980. Hence this pe ti t ion for review . Peti tione r wr aps up i t s position this wi s e : "The Collector of Customs i mposed and col l ected t he 5\ customs duty (pe r PD 1 395) .on t he exempt portion of the subject i mportat i on ba s ed on the to t a l l ande d cost plus mar up the r eof and no on t he home consumption value of t he s ub- . j ect i mpor t a tion as de t ermined unde r Section 201 of t he Tari f f and Customs Code in r e lation to PD 1395 a s i mple- mente d by Depar tmen t Order No. 13-7.8 . The Coll ec t or of Customs rel i ed on t he pr ovisions of Section. 3 of Depa rtment . Or der No . 13-7.8 and of Section 1 9 3 of the Nation a I nter na l Reve� n ue Code which provisions of l aw have no a pplica t i on to the case at ba r because wha t is involved here is ot the 5i i nt e rn a l r evenue tax but t he 5\ c us toms �dutie s per PD 1395. " The r e spondent ave r s , "The c onten tion of appe llan . . (herein peti t i oner ) tha the comput a tion of the 5% tax should be bas ed me r e ly on t he home consumption va lue as de termined under Secti on 20 1 of the Tari ff and Cus t oms Code is evoid of any l egal basis in t he ligh of all th ore uo e rev i sions of aw imp emen ting regulat i ns and PD 1 395 . When we speak of interna l revenue t a advance 247
DECISIO CTA CASE O. 3371 - 4- sales t ax i n these cases , specifica l ly ) '� the afore-cited provision of th revenue code and Reven e Regulatio s o . S- 78 should a pply whi ch i nva ri a bl y i nclude the mark- up . And as ordained unde r PD 13. 95, the 5% tax should be levied , assessed and collected in accordance with the per tinent provisions of such code , which is what t he Collector corre ctly did . " And , as e a rlie r ma i n tai ned by the Col lecto of Cus toms , "Section 201 of the Tariff and Customs Code of 1978 invok ed by protestant (herein petitioner ) ~ a s positively no applicable basis to the case at bar cons idering that said Secti on 201 r e l a tes to the computation of ' dut i a ble va lue ' f o r purpose s o f i mposing ' c.ustoms duty' .a nd not 'tax ' .beca use in a r iving at the ' t .axable value � as i n t his instant protests t he pertinent provisions of Nationa I n ternal Revenue Code of 1977 is the l aw applic able . n More- over , "The q uestion or is sue of t he assessment a nd paymen t of 'customs duty' i s settled i nasmuch as protestant (he r e in pe titioner ) .i s r equired by l aw to pay i n f ull said cus toms duty on the en tr ies nder protest. ha is lef t a t i s sue then i s the assessment and pa yme nt of fiv e (5%) .t ax which is to be imposed on the exempt portion , in addition to the tax du e on the t axable portion . The a rgument then that t his Of fice erred i c omputing the f ive (5% ) .Pe r c en t tax based on the t ota l l anded cost a nd no o the home c'onsumpticn f valu s erroneo , i being devoid of any l egal author i t y 248
DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 3371 - .s - .. s ince Sec ti on 201 o f the Tarif f and Cus toms Code is not applicable ." Give n the quir ky particula rs of the ci rcums t ances obtaining the parties seem to have s ubst an tially di ffered and di ver ged mo s t sharply on the materi a l fac t ual i ssue . But the only point ur ged upon ou con sidera ti on of why t he deci sion appeal ed from s hould be reversed i s the alle ged i ncorrectly based impos ition and col l ec tion of customs du ti es by virtue of Presidential Decr ee 395 o the exempt portion of the subject impor t a tions which c on- sequence proved onerous to the petitioner by such ove r - � p a yment of ~18 4 , 94 1. 9 2 outlined as foll ows : Bislig Protes t No. 15-79 = p 498 . 00 Bisl ig Prote s t o . 1 6- 7.9 3u835. 0 Bislig Protest No . 17-7.9 5,392 . 09 Bislig Pro test o . 18- 7.9 3, 177 . 00 Bi s ig r otes t o . 19-7.9 4"6 ,419.00 "' Bis l ig Pro te s t No. 22-79 46 ,542 . 37 Bislig Pro tes t No . 23-7.9 8 , 954 . 58 Bislig Protest o . 1-8.0 6,386 . 37 Bislig Protest No . 5-80 55, 951.04 Bislig Pro test No. 10-8.0 420. 68 Bislig Protest No. 11- 8..0 92 . 19 Bisli g Protest No . 3-8.0 1,682. 56 T 0 TAL � � � 1118 4, 941 . 92 (s ic) Responden t must ave lost the fore s t f o r the tr ees so to speak by assuming a question relative to an incorrec tness of t he computation of t he in ternal revenue tax based on t he t otal l anded cost plus mark up " since Section 201 of the Ta iff nd Customs Code i s no t applicable. ' ;���. 249
DEC I SI ON - CTA CASE NO . 371 - - 6 . . Putting aside the apparent uibble, it is hardly necessary to observe tha t he terms of PD 1395 , supra , as i mplemented , the add i tional 5% c ustoms d uty is direct y t acked on the home con sumpt i on value wh ile the 5' i n t ernal � r evenu~ tax i s essentially addressed t o the tota l anded cost of t he i mported articles . Section 201 of t he Tari ff and Customs Code determines the first and Section 193 b) of the National In ternal Revenue Code , the l atter, quoted respecti vely as follows: "Section 201. Basis of Dut iable Va lue . -The duti able value of an i mpor ted article subjec t o an ad valorem rat e of duty shall be based o t he home consumption value or price (excl uding i nterna exc i se t axes) of same , l ike or similar ar tie es , x includ ing t he value of all contai ners, co- . verings and/or packings of any kind and all other c osts , charge s and ex.penses i nciden t to placing t he artic le in a condition r eady f or s hipmen to the Phi lipp ines , plus ten (10%) per cen of s uch home consumption value or p rice : " � . "Sect i on 1 93 e {b ) Sales t ax on imported ar tic l es . x x the percen tage t axe s x -x s hall be pa id in a ance by the i mporter , x x x base on the home consumption val ue or price (excluding i nternal r evenue exci se taxes) thereof , plus ten (1 0% ) per cent of such home consumption value 0 price ; i ncluding postage , commission , customs duty and all simi lar charges , x . " We f ind no threa~ of ambiguity fr om the language of the s a i d p rov i sions i nsofar as the s ame i s brought t bear upon the circumstances of t he petitioner i n t he case at bar . The t e r ms a re amply suffici en to dispe l any pall c e tain ty cast o e r the pet i t ione g c a i o The part icul ar i mpos i tion of ei ther a duty or tax appears 250
DEC ISION - CTA CASE NO . 3371 - 7- c~llirig ly exp licit and severely cons t rai ned . The requir e- ments f or effective i mpleme n tation t he r eof are o clea r impor t and one may no t be nard put t o r e s t a c hoice of the ba sis f or t he l ev i es. As had ha ppened , t he re spondent no only fai led to in fuse va l id cogn i zance , but would have t he f oc us i ng question exped ientl y t reated as ne ither here nor there , 11 For, � n stead of basing the 5% c us toms d uty on t he home c onsumption value of the subjec i mpo rtation as deter - mi ned unde r Section 201 of the Ta riff and Cus t oms Code the Col lector of Customs i mposed the 5% cu stoms du ty on t he ba s is of the t ota l l a nded cos t p lus ma rk up of t he impo t e d art i c l es. " We think the r espondent ha s f umb l e d i nto a rever sible error . � Unde r th e cir cums t ances , we are pe r su aded to e x tend t he r e lief s ough t by the pe t i tioner r elati ve to i ts claim for r efund of the amou.n t r epresent i ng ove r paymen ts �o f the 5% customs duties on the exemp t por ti on o sub j ec t i mport- ations c onditioned �however upon a r e iquidation of t he c orre spondi ng i mpor t ~ntr i es covered by the pro tests . WHEREFORE , as a bove qua li f i ed , the r e sponden t is hereby dir ect ed t o ran t the r efund withou pronouncemen t as to cos ts . 251
I� DEC ISION - CTA C SE NO . 3371 - 8- SO ORDERED. Que zon City, Metro Man ila, October 31, 1984e WE CONCUR : ~~~ Presidi 9 J udge 252
More in CTA Decisions
- BATANGAS ELECTRIC 1 COOPERATIVE I (BATELEC I) v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8423)
- ST. PAUL COLLEGE OF SAN RAFAEL v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8217)
- TUTUBAN PROPERTIES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7634)
- NORTHWIND POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8260)
- PHILEX MINING CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7587)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. LOYOLA PLANS CONSOLIDATED, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 202)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. CE CASECNAN WATER AND ENERGY COMPANY, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 1158)
- CTA Case No. 81 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 81)
Want an analysis of this document?
Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.