Course Outline-Tax Review
Course Outline-Tax Review
Course Outline-Tax Review
COLLEGE OF LAW
LA TRINIDAD, BENGUET
TAX REVIEW COURSE OUTLINE
Second Semester SY 2016-2017
Other Cases:
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Pineda, 21 SCRA 105
CIR v. Filinvest Development Corp., 654 SCRA 56
B. Nature of Taxation
Attribute of sovereignty
Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company of the Philippines v. Municipality of Tanauan, Leyte, 69 SCRA 460
Legislative in character and generally not delegated
(i) General rule
(ii) Exceptions
(a) Delegation to local governments (Sec 5, Art. X, PC)
(b) By the Constitution (Sec. 28(2). Art. X)
(c) Delegation to administrative agencies
-implementation that may call for some degree of discretionary powers under a set
of sufficient standards expressed by law - Pelaez v. Auditor General, 15 SCRA 569
-or implied from the policy and purpose of the law Maceda v. Macaraig, 223
SCRA 217
C. Purposes of Taxation
Page 1 of 27
Regulatory
Caltex Philippines v. COA, G.R. No, 92585, May 8, 1992
Tio v. Videogram, 151 SCRA 208
PAL V. Edu
Other Cases:
Gaston v. Republic Bank, 153 SCRA 626
1. Fiscal adequacy
2. Administrative feasibility
Diaz v. The Secretary of Finance, 654 SCRA 96
3. Theoretical justice
1. Inherent limitations
a) Public purpose
Lutz v. Araneta, G.R. No. L-7859, December 22, 1955
Planters Product, Inc. v. FertiPhil Corp, GR No. 166006, March 14, 2008
b) Inherently legislative
(i) General rule
(ii) Exceptions
(a) Delegation to local governments
(b) Delegation to the President
(c) Delegation to administrative agencies
c) Territorial
Situs of Taxation
CIR v. Marubeni Corp., GR No. 137377, December 18, 2001
(d) International comity
(e) Exemption of government entities, agencies, and instrumentalities
Board of Assessment Appeals of Laguna v. CTA, GR No, L-18125, May 31, 1963
Mactan Cebu International Authority v. Marcos, GR No.120082, September 11, 1996
PFDA v. Municipality of Navotas, GR No. 150301, October 2, 2007
MIAA v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 155650, July 20, 2006
MIAA V. Pasay City, GR No. 163072, April 2, 2009
Republic of the Philippines v. Arlene Soriano, G.R. No.211666, 25 February 2015
Other Cases-limitations
Bagatsing v. Ramirez, 74 SCRA 306
Pascual v. Sec. of Public Works and Communications, 110 Phil. 331
Manila Electric Company v. Yatco, 69 Phil 89
2. Constitutional limitations
a) Provisions directly affecting taxation
(i) Prohibition against imprisonment for non-payment of poll tax
Page 2 of 27
(ii) Uniformity and equality of taxation
(iii) Grant by Congress of authority to the president to impose tariff rates
(iv) Prohibition against taxation of religious, charitable entities, and
educational entities
(v) Prohibition against taxation of non-stock, non-profit institutions
(vi) Majority vote of Congress for grant of tax exemption
(vii) Prohibition on use of tax levied for special purpose
(viii) Presidents veto power on appropriation, revenue, tariff bills
(ix) Non-impairment of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
(x) Grant of power to the local government units to create its own sources of revenue
(xi) Flexible tariff clause
(xii) Exemption from real property taxes
(xiii) No appropriation or use of public money for religious purposes
Cases:
CIR v. M.J. Lhuiller Pawnshop, Inc., GR No. 150947, July 15, 2003
CIR v. CA and Fortune, GR No. 119761, August 29, 1996
City of Manila v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, GR No. 181845, August 4, 2009
City of Baguio v. De Leon, 25 SCRA 938
ABAKADA Guro Party List v. Purisima, October 14, 2008
Association of Customs Brokers v. Manila, 93 Phil 107
Shell Company of Phil. Islands v. Mun. of Cordova, 94 Phil 339
CREBA v. Exec. Sec Romulo, GR No. 160756, March 9, 2010
Commissioner of Customs v. Hypermix Feeds Corporation, GR No. 179759, February 1, 2012
Judy Anne Santos v. People, GR No. 173176, August 26, 2008
American Bible Society v. City of Manila, 101 Phil 386
Angeles University v. City of Angeles, GR No. 189999, June 27, 2012
RMC 76-2003
Department of Finance Order No. 137-87, dated December 16, 1987
Lung Center of the Phil v. Quezon City, June 29, 2004
Abra Valley College v. Aquino, GR No. L-39086, June 15, 1988
Sison v. Ancheta, GR No. 59431, July 25, 1984
Ormoc Sugar Company v. Treasurer of Ormoc, GR No. 23794, February 17, 1968
Villegas v. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho, GR No. L-29646
Tolentino v.Secretary of Finance, GR No. 115455, August 25, 1994
F. Doctrines in Taxation
2. Imprescriptibility
3. Double taxation
Definition Victoria Milling v. Mun of Victoria Negros Occidental, G.R. No. L-21183,
September 27, 1968
Villanueva v. City of Iloilo, GR No. L-26521, December 28, 1968
Cases:
Yutivo Sons Hardware v. CTA, G.R. No. L-13203, January 28, 1961
CIR v. Estate of Benigno Toda Jr., G.R. No. 78583, March 26, 1990
Republic v. Gonzales, G.R. No. L-17962, April 30, 1965
CIR v. Reyes, Nos. G.R. L-11558, November 25, 1958
Republic v. Heirs of Jalandoni, 20 Sept 1965
CIR v. American Rubber
CIR v. PLDT, GR 140230, December 15, 2005
Silkair Singapore v. CIR, GR No. 173594, February 6, 2008
6. Compensation and set-off Philex Mining Corp v. CIR, August 29, 1998
See section 76, NIRC; Francia v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 76749, June 28,
1988
Republic v. Mambulao, G.R. No. L-17725, February 28, 1962
Exception Domingo v. Garlitos, G.R. No. L-18849, June 29, 1963
7. Compromise
8. Tax amnesty
a) Definition
b) Distinguished from tax exemption
H. Situs of Taxation
(a) Meaning
(b) Situs of income tax
I. Aspects/Stages of Taxation
1. Levy
2. Assessment and collection
3. Payment
4. Refund
J. Taxes
1. Definition, nature, and characteristics of taxes
Progressive Development Corp. v. Quezon City, G.R. No. L-36081, April 24, 2989
L. Kinds/Classification of taxes
1. As to object
a) Personal, capitation, or poll tax
b) Property tax
c) Privilege tax
2. As to burden or incidence
a) Direct
b) Indirect
Page 5 of 27
Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, GR No. 115455, October 30, 1995
Maceda v. Macaraig, 197 SCRA 771
Exxonmobil Petroleum and Chemical Holdings, Inc., Philippine Branch v. CIR, 640 SCRA
203
3. As to tax rates
a) Specific
b) Ad valorem
c) Mixed
4. As to purposes
a) General or fiscal
b) Special, regulatory, or sumptuary
6. As to graduation
a) Progressive
b) Regressive
c) Proportionate
M. Tax Credit
Commissioner v, Internal Revenue v. Mirant (Philippines) Operations, Corporation, 652 SCRA 80
Microsoft Philippines, Inc. vs. CIR, 647 SCRA 398
D. General Principles of Income Taxation in the Philippines Section 23, Chapter II,
NIRC
Page 6 of 27
Tests in determining whether income is earned for tax purposes
CIR v. Isabela Cultural Corporation, GR No. 172231, February 12, 2007 (all events
test)
I. Kinds of taxpayers
Taxpayer definition Sec 22(N), NIRC
1. Individual taxpayers/Tax on Individuals - Section 24 to 26, NIRC
2. Corporations/ Tax on Corporations Section 27 to 30, NIRC
Definition - Section 22B in relation to Revenue Regulations 10-2012
Note Exemption Section 30, NIRC
3. Partnerships
4. General professional partnerships
5. Estates and trusts
6. Co-ownerships
Page 7 of 27
Partners Distributive Shares from the Net Income of a General Professional
Partnership
Page 8 of 27
CIR v. Central Luzon Drug Corp., GR No. 159647, April 15, 2005
CIR v. Central Luzon Drug Corp., GR No. 148512, June 26, 2006;
Bicolandia Drug Corp., v. CIR, GR No. 142299, June 22, 2006; see also CIR v. Central
Luzon Drug Corp., GR No. 159610, June 2008, in relation to RA 9267
Carlos Superdrug Corporation v. DSWD, GR No. 166494, June 29, 2007
b. Interest
Tax Arbitrage Scheme Rev Reg 13-2000 GR. No. L-25399, July 29, 1969
Interest on Tax Delinquencies CIR v. Itogon Suyoc Mines
c. Taxes
d. Losses
Kinds:
Ordinary
Casualty losses
Gains and Losses from dealings in property
Ordinary Asset v. Capital Asset
China Banking Corporation v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 125508, July
19, 2000
Losses from wash sales of stock or securities sec 34(D)(5)
Wagering losses
Abandonment Losses
Non-deductible losses
Net Operating Loss Carry-over (NOLCO
PICOP v. CIR, GR. No. L-106949, December 1, 1995
e. Bad debts
Philex Mining Corporation v. CIR, GR No. 148187, April 16, 2008
f. Depreciation
Basilan Estates, Inc., v. CIR, GR No. L-22492, September 5, 1997
Conwell Bros. v. Collector, CTA case no. 411
Italian Thai Development Public Company Ltd., v. CIR, CTA case no.
6172, November 12, 2002
Properties not subject to depreciation Limpan Investment Corp. v.
o CIR, L-21570, July 26, 1966; Section 106, RR No. 2
15. Determination of Amount and Recognition of Gain or Loss Section 40, NIRC
1. Personal and additional exemption for Individual Taxpayers Section 35, NIRC
as amended by RA 9504
Note (R.A. No. 9504, Minimum Wage Earner Law)
General rule
Change of status Pansacola v. CIR, GR No. 159991, November 16, 2006
7. Tax Return and Payment Section 51, 56, Chapter IX, NIRC
L. TAXATION OF CORPORATIONS
Definition
Classification of Corporations/Special Types of Corporations
Tax Rates - Section 27 to 29, NIRC
Test in Determining Status of corporations
Law of Incorporation Test
Inclusions/Exclusions
China Banking Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 175108. February 27, 2013.
1. Domestic Corporations
a. Tax payable
b. Regular tax
c. Minimum Corporate Income Tax (MCIT)
CREBA v. Exec. Sec. Romulo
Manila Banking Corporation v. CIR, GR No. 168118, August 28, 2006
CIR v. PAL, GR No. 180066, July 7, 2009
d. Improperly Accumulated Earnings Tax
Cyanamid Phils., v. CA, GR No. 108067, July 7, 2009
e. Allowable deductions
i) Itemized deductions
ii) Optional standard deduction
f. Taxation of passive income
i) Passive income subject to tax
ii)Passive income not subject to tax
g. Taxation of capital gains
h. Tax on Special Domestic Corporations
a. proprietary educational institutions and non-profit hospitals
b. Depositary Banks
i. Tax on government-owned or controlled corporations, agencies or
instrumentalities
j. Tax Returns and Other Administrative Requirements
Paseo Realty and Development Corp., v. CA, GR No. 119286, October 13, 2004
CIR v. Mirant (Philippines) Operations Corporation, GR No. 171742, June 15,
2011
CIR v. PI. Management International Philippines, Inc., GR No. 160949, April 4,
2011
5. Partnerships
a. Taxation of partnerships
b. Taxation of general professional partnerships
A. ESTATE TAX
a. Basic principles
b. Definition
c. Nature
Lorenzo v. Posadas, GR No. L-43082, June 18, 1937
d. Purpose or object
e. Time and transfer of properties
f. Classification of decedent
g. Gross estate vis--vis net estate
Page 12 of 27
Dizon v . CTA, GR No. 140944, April 30, 2008
h. Determination of gross estate and net estate
i. Composition of gross estate
j. Items to be included in gross estate
k. Deductions from estate
CIR v. CA and Pajonar, GR No. 123206, March 22, 2000
l. Exclusions from estate
m. Tax credit for estate taxes paid in a foreign country
n. Exemption of certain acquisitions and transmissions
o. Filing of notice of death
p. Estate tax return
B. DONORS TAX
a. Basic principles
b. Definition
c. Nature
d. Purpose or object
e. Requisites of valid donation
f. Transfers which may be constituted as donation
1) Sale/exchange/transfer of property for insufficient consideration
2) Condonation/remission of debt
g. Transfer for less than adequate and full consideration
h. Classification of donor
i. Determination of gross gift
j. Composition of gross gift
k. Valuation of gifts made in property
l. Tax credit for donors taxes paid in a foreign country
m. Exemptions of gifts from donors tax
n. Person liable
o. Tax basis
A. Concept/Nature
Kapatiran v. Tan, GR NO. L-81311, June 30, 1988
Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, August 25, 1994 (orig dec) and GR No. 115455, October 30,
1995 (Motion for Reconsideration)
ABAKADA Guro Party List v. Ermita, GR. No. 168056, September 1, 2005
CIR v. Magsaysay Lines, GR No. 146984, July 28, 2006
Philippine Acetylene v. CIR, August 17, 1967
CIR v. American Rubber, November 29, 1966
CIR v. John Gotamco and Sons, February 27, 1987
.
Page 13 of 27
Silicon Philippines, Inc. v. CIR, GR No. 172378, January 17, 2011
Microsoft Philippines, Inc. v. CIR, 644 SCRA 433
CIR v. Seksui Jushi Phils, Inc. GR No. 149671, July 21, 2006
Western Mindanao Power Corporation v. CIR, GR No. 181136, June 13, 2012
Panasonic v. CIR, GR No. 178090, February 8, 2010
Hitachi v. CIR, GR No. 174212, October 20, 2010
CIR v. Manila Mining Corp., GR No. 153204, August 31, 2005
PAGCOR v. BIR, GR No. 172087, March 15, 2011
L. VAT on Services
CIR v. Placerdome Tech Services (Phils), GR No. 164365, June 8, 2007
CIR v. American Express Phil Branch, GR No. 1526-0, June 29, 2005
Page 14 of 27
Panay Power Corporation v. CIR- G.R. No. 203351, 21 January 2015
Cargill Philippines v. CIR G.R. No. 203774, 11 March 2015
Philippine National Bank v. CIR G.R. No. 206019; 18 March 2015
Commisioner of Internal Revenue Vs. Mirant Pagbilao Corporation, G. R. No.180434, January 20,
2016
Silicon Philippines, Inc. Vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, GR No. 182737, March 2, 2016
A. Government remedies
1. As to Nature of Proceedings
Administrative Remedies in Detail
1. Tax Lien (Section 219, NIRC)
a. CIR v. NLRC, GR No. 74965, 9 November 1994
2. Compromise
3. Distant of personal property or garnishment of bank deposits
4. Levy of real properties
4. Forfeiture
5. Suspension if business operations
6. Enforcement of administrative fines
Judicial remedies
1. Civil Action
2. Criminal Action
Page 15 of 27
b. Civil Cases (Consider the amount of tax sought to be collected vis--vis the
jurisdiction of courts, together with the provisions of RA9282)
3. Cases:
a. Republic v. Hizon, GR No. 130430, 13 December 1999 (re approval of filing of civil and
criminal action)
b. CIR v. La Suerte Cigar, G.G. No. 144942, 4 July 2002 (Re participation of the Office of
the Solicitor General)
c. PNOC v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 109976, April 26, 2005*
d. Lim v. CA, GR. Nos. 48134-37, 18 October 1990, 190 SCRA 616 (re prescription of
criminal actions, Section 281, NIRC)
e. Marcos II v. CA, GR No. 120880, 5 June 1997 (re enforcement of tax liability during
pendency of probate proceedings)
f. Judy Anne Santos v. People, GR No. 173176, 26 August 2008
2. Remedies as to Procedure
Assessment and Collection
Collection without assessment
Assessment -
Concept of assessment
What constitutes assessment?
CIR v. Hon. Gonzales, GR No. 177279, October 13, 2010
CIR v. Enron Subic Power Corporation, GR No. 166387, January 19, 2009 relate
with CIR v. BPI, GR No. 134052, April 17, 2007
CIR v. Pascor Realty, June 29, 1999
CIR v. Reyes, GR No. 159694, January 27, 2006
Principles
CIR v. Hon. Gonzalez and LM Camus Engineering Corporation, GR No.
177279, October 13, 2010
Power of the Commissioner to make assessments and prescribe
additional requirements for tax administration and enforcement
Kinds of assessment
Statute of Limitation on Assessment of Internal Revenue Taxes (Sections
202, 222, NIRC)
Rmo 20-90, Philippine Journalists Inc., v. CIR, GR No. 162852, December
16, 2004
CIR v. Kudos Metal Corporation, GR No. 178087, May 5, 2010
CIR v. CA AND CARNATION, GR No. 115712, February 25, 1999
RCBC v. CIR, GR No. 170257, September 7, 2011
Suspension of prescriptive period
Republic v. Hizon, December 13, 1999
BPI v. CIR, GR No. 139736, October 17, 2005
BPI v. CIR, GR No. 174942, March 7, 2008
When assessment is made
General provisions on additions to the tax
Assessment process
Estate of the Late Juliana Diez vda De Gabriel v. CIR, GR No. 155541, January 27,
2004
CIR v. Reyes, GR No. 159694, January27, 2006
PNOC v. Court of Appeas, GR No. 109976, April 26, 2005
CIR v. Menguito, GR No. 16750, September 17, 2008 relate with CIR v. Metro Star
Superama, GR No. 185371, December 8, 2010
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. United Salvage and Towage (Phils), Inc., G.R. No. 197515,
July 2, 2014
Commissioner of Internal Revenue Vs. GJM Philippines Manufacturing, Inc., GR
No. 202695, February 29, 2016 (BIR must prove receipt of notice by TP)
Commissioner of Internal Revenue Vs. Liquigaz Philippines Corporation/Liquigaz
Philippines Corporation/Commissioner of Internal Revenue, GR No.
215534/215557, April 18, 2016 (FDDA)
Page 16 of 27
Necessity of Assessment before taxpayer can be prosecuted for violation of
the NIRC
Ungab v. Cusi, May 30, 1980
CIR v. CA, GR No. 119322, June 4, 1996
CIR v. Pascor Realty, June 29, 1999
CIR v. Hon. Gonzalez and LM Camus Engineering Corporation, GR No. 177279,
October 13, 2010
]
Retroactivity CIR v. Reyes, GR No. 159694, January 27, 2006
Instances when pre-assessment is not required (Section 228)
Collection
Requisites
Prescriptive periods
Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No.
181836, July 9, 2014
B. Effects of failure to pay the tax on time: Additions to the tax (Chapter I, Title X, NIRC)
1. Surcharges
a. Ordinary (Section 248A, NIRC)
Failure to pay tax on time as required by the tax code or the regulations
Failure to pay the deficiency tax within the time fixed in the notice
Filing of the return with the wrong office
b. Fraud Penalty (Section 248B, NIRC)
CIR v. Javier Jr., GR No. 78953, 31 July 1991 (199
SCRA 825)
c. Cases:
i. Imposition of Surcharge in mandatory
NOTES
a. No injunction to restrain collection of taxes (Sec. 218, NIRC)
b. Period within which the government could collect (Sections 203, 222, NIRC)
Case: Republic v. Hizon, GR No. 130430, 13 December 1999; CIR v. Javier Jr., GR
No. 78953, 31 July 1991 (199 SCRA 825); PNOC v. CA, GR No. 109976, 26 April 2005;
BPI v. CIR, GR No. 174942, 7 March 2008
Page 17 of 27
c. Determination of prescription of collection within CTAs appellate jurisdiction: CIR v.
Hambrecht and Quist Philippines, GR No. 169225, 27 November 2010
After Payment
1. Refund (Section 229, NIRC)
a. Must be strictly construed against the taxpayer; Taxpayer must show the legal
and factual basis for the tax refund Case: Citibank, NA v. Court of Appeals, GR
No. 107434, 10 October 1997, 280 SCRA 459; FEBTC v. CIR, GR No. 138919, 02
May 2006; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Far East Bank e Trust Co., G.R.
No. 173854 dated March 16, 2010
b. Grounds for filing a claim for refund (See Section 229, See also: Engtek Phils v.
CIR, CTA Case No. 6644, 26 January 2005)
c. Procedure in filing a claim for refund
CIR v. Acosta, GR No. 154068, 3 August 2007
d. Period within which to file a claim for refund
General rule is two years from the date of payment Cases: ACCRA
Investments Corporation v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 96322, 20 December
1991; CIR v. TMX Sales, 15 January 1992; CIR v. PhilAm Life, 29 May 1995;
CIR v. CA and BPI, GR No. 117254, 21 January 1999; CIR v. PNB, GR No.
161997, 25 October 2005 (exception to the 2-year period); CIR v. Primetown
Property Group, GR No. 162155, 28 August 2007).
Page 18 of 27
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. San Roque Power
Corporation/Taganito Mining Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal
Revenue/Philex Mining Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R.
No. 187485/G.R. No. 196113/G.R. No. 197156. February 12, 2013
o
In case of amended returns
In case of taxpayers contemplating dissolution Case: BPI v. CIR, 28
August 2001; See also: Sections 52(c) and 56(a)
In case of VAT Refund (Please see topic on VAT)
e. Who has the personality to file a claim for refund?
1. CIR v. Proctor and Gamble, GR No. 66838, 2 December 1991**
2. CIR v. CA 20 January 1999
3. Silkair v. CIR, GR Nos. 171383 e 172379, 14 November 2008
4. CIR v. Smart Communications, GR No. 179045-46, 25 August 2010***
5. Exxonmobil Petroleum and Chemical Holdings v. CIR, GR No. 180909, 19
January 2011
6. Silkair (Singapore) Pte., Ltd. v. Commissioner on Internal Revenue, G.R.
No. 166482, 25 January 2012***
f. Is setting-off of taxes against a pending claim for refund allowed? The doctrine
of equitable recoupmentCase: Philex MiningCorp. V. CIR, GR No. 125704, 28
August 1998
g. Is automatic application of excess tax credits allowed? (Sec. 76) Please see
Calamba Steel v. CIR, GR No. 151857, 28 April 2005; Systra Philippines v. CIR,
GR No. 176290, 21 September2007; CIR v. BPI, GR No. 178490, 07 July 2009
(Irrevocability Rule)***; Philam Asset Management v. CIR, G.R. Nos.
156637/162004, December 14, 2005); Asianworld Properties Philippine
Corporation v. CIR, GR No. 171766, 29 July 2010; CIR v. Philam Life and Gen.
Ins. Co. GR No. 175124, 29 September 2010; CIR v. Mcgeorge Food Industries,
GR No. 174157, 20 October 2010; CIR v. Mirant (Philippnes) Operations
Corporation, G.R. No. 171742, 15 June 2011 CIR v. PL Management Inernational
Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 160949, April 4, 2011.
h. Effect of existing tax liability on a pending claim for refund Case: CIR v. CA
and Citytrust, GR No. 106611, 21 July 1994; See also (CIR v. CItytrust Banking
Corporation, 22 August, 22 August 2006).
i. Period of validity of a tax refund/credit (Sec. 230, NIRC)
i. Returns are not actionable documents for purposes of the rules on civil
procedure and evidence (See: Aguilar v. CIR, CA Case dated 3- March
1990)
ii. Nature of a tax credit certificate (Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation v.
CIR, GR No. 172598, 21 December 2007)
j. Refund and Protest are mutually exclusive remedies Case: Vda. De San
Agustin v. VIR, 10 September 2001
k. Is the taxpayer entitled to claim interest on the refunded tax? (Sec. 79 (c) 2,
NIRC)
Other Remedies
1. Action to Contest Forfeiture of Chattel (Sec. 231)
2. Redemption of Property Sold (Sec. 214)
A. Nature
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Toledo, Power, Inc., G.R. No. 183880, January 20, 2014.
B. Legal Basis
C. Powers
D. Composition
E. Jurisdiction
Automatic Review Yaokasin v. Commissioner of Customs, GR No. 84111, Decmber 22, 1989
Real Property cases decided by RTC not under CTA Juris Habawel v. CTA, GR No. 174759,
September 7, 2011
Final and Executory or Undisputed Assessments Republic v. Abella, GR No. L-26989,
February 20, 1981
Ancillary remedy Commissioner of Customs v. Alikpala, GR No. L-32542, November 26, 1970
Silicon Philippines, Inc. Vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, GR No. 182737, March 2, 2016
Spouses Emmanuel D. Paquiao and Jinkee J. Paquiao Vs. The Court of Tax Appeals (1st
Division) and the Commission of Internal Revenue, GR No. 213394, April 6, 2016
F. Appeal Periods
B. Judicial procedures
1. Judicial action for collection of taxes a)
Internal revenue taxes
b) Local taxes
(i) Prescriptive period
2. Civil cases
a) Who may appeal, mode of appeal, effect of appeal
Page 20 of 27
(i) Suspension of collection of tax
a) Injunction not available to restrain collection
(ii) Taking of evidence
(iii) Motion for reconsideration or new trial
b) Appeal to the CTA, en banc
c) Petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court
3. Criminal cases
a) Institution and prosecution of criminal actions
(i) Institution of civil action in criminal action
b) Appeal and period to appeal
(i) Solicitor General as counsel for the people and government officials sued
in their official capacity
c) Petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court
C. Taxpayers suit impugning the validity of tax measures or acts of taxing authorities
1. Taxpayers suit, defined
2. Distinguished from citizens suit
3. Requisites for challenging the constitutionality of a tax measure or act of taxing
authority
a) Concept of locus standi as applied in taxation
b) Doctrine of transcendental importance c) Ripeness for judicial determination
A. Local taxation
Nature of the local taxing power
1. Constitutional provision (Section 5, Article X)
2. Delegated power
a. City of San Pablo, Laguna v. Reyes, 25 March 1999
b. Meralco v. Province of Laguna, 5 May 1999
c. Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. Marcos, 11 September 1996
d. NAPOCOR v. City of Cabanatuan, 9 April 2003
3. Extent of the power of Congress in local taxation
a. City Government of Quezon City v. Bayantel, G.R. No. 162015, March 6, 2006
4. Residual power tax (Section 186, LGC)
Fundamental principles on the exercise of the local taxing power (Section 130, LGC)
Exercise of local taxing power
Camp John Hay Development Corp. v. Central Board of Assessment Appeals
B. Common Limitations on the exercise of the local taxing power and the principle of
preemption. Exclusionary rule (Section 133, LGC)
The principle of preemption
Cases:
1. Province of Bulacan v. Court of Appeals, 27 November 1998
2. First Philippine Industrial Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 125948, December 29, 1998
(Section 133j; Local Tax on Common Carriers)
3. Palama Development Corporation v. Municipality of Malangas, GR No. 152492, 16
October 2003 (Section 133e)
Page 21 of 27
4. Batangas Power Corporation v. Batangas City, GR No. 152675, 28 April 2004 (Section
133g)
5. MIAA v. CA and Paranaque, GR No. 155650, 20 July 2006 (Section 133 o)
6. LTO v. City of Butuan, 20 January 2000 (re Section 133(l))
7. Philreca v. DILG, 10 June 2003 (re Section 133 n)
8. Petron Corporation v. Tiangco, GR no. 158881, 16 April 2008 (Petroleum Products)
E. Grant of tax exemption by local government units (Section 282 (b), IRR)
a. Tax Exemption v. Tax Incentive
Provicial Assesor of the Agusan Del Sur Vs. Filipinas Palm Plantation, Inc. GR No. 183416,
October 5, 2016 (exemption of cooperatives)
Page 23 of 27
a. Ownership v. Use
b. Testate Estate of Concordia Lim v. Manila, 21 February 2000
c. Government Service Insurance System v. City Treasurer and City Assessor of the City
of Manila, G.R. No. 186242 23 December 2009
8. Procedure in Real Property Taxation
a. Lopez v. City of Manila, 19 February 1999
b. Declaration of real properties - whose duty?
c. Valuation by Assessors
Callanta v. Ombudsman, 30 January 1998
d. Preparation of Schedule of Fair Market Values
e. Enactment of a Real Property tax Ordinance
f. Levy annual ad valorem tax
1. Scope of the LGUs taxing power (Sec. 232, LGC)
a. Provinces 1 %; Cities, Municipalities in MM 2%
b. SEF 1%; Idle land tax 5%; Special Assessments
ii. Fix assessment levels
iii. Provide for appropriations
iv. Adopt Schedule of Fair Market Values
1. Fair Market Value and Assessed Value Whats the difference?
Page 24 of 27
a. Systems Plus Computer College v. Caloocan City, G.R. No. 146382,
August 7, 2003
b. Olivare v. Marquez, G.R. No. 155591, September 22, 2004
3. Protest of the Assessment (Section 226,252, LGC)
a. Cagayan Robina v. Court of Appeals, 12 October 2000
b. Meralco v. Barlis, 18 May 2001
c. Meralco v. Barlis, 2 February 2002
d. Meralco v. Barlis, 29 June 2004
e. National Power Corporation v. Province of Quezon and Municipality of
Pagbilao, G.R. No. 171586 25 January 2010
National Power Corporation Vs. The Provincial Treasurer of Benguet, et al.,
GR No. 209303, November 14, 2016
4. Claim for refund (Section 253, LGC)
a. Period
5. Remedies from a denial of the protest and refund
a. mandamus is not a proper remedy: Habawel v. Court of Tax Appeals, G.R.
No. 174759, 7 September 2011
6. Redemption of Property Sold (Section 261, LGC; City Mayor of Quezon City v.
RCBC, GR No. 171033, 3 August 2010)
ii. Judicial
1. Questioning tax sale: Aquino v. QC, GR No. 137534, 3 August 2006; NHA v. Iloilo City,
GR No. 172267, 20 August 2008
2. Writ of execution nt necessary - Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. vs. City of Manila; Liberty M.
Toledo, in her capacity as Officer-in-Charge (OIC), Treasurer of the City of Manila; Joseph
Santiago, in his capacity as OIC, Chief License Division of the City of Manila; Reynaldo Montalbo,
in his capacity as City Auditor of the City of Manila, G.R. No. 197561, April 7, 2014
G. Requirements of importation
1. Beginning and ending of importation
2. Obligations of importer
a) Cargo manifest
b) Import entry
c) Declaration of correct weight or value
d) Liability for payment of duties
e) Liquidation of duties
f) Keeping of records
Page 25 of 27
H. Importation in violation of tax credit certificate
1. Smuggling
2. Other fraudulent practices
I. Classification of duties
1. Ordinary/regular duties
a) Ad valorem; methods of valuation
(i) Transaction value
(ii) Transaction value of identical goods
(iii) Transaction value of similar goods
(iv) Deductive value
(v) Computed value
(vi) Fallback value
b) Specific
2. Special duties
a) Dumping duties
b) Countervailing duties
c) Marking duties
d) Retaliatory/discriminatory duties
e) Safeguard
J. Valuation of Goods
a. Home Consumption Value
b. Transaction Value (Republic Act No. 9135)
K. Flexible Tariff
L. Cases that may be decided by the Bureau of Customs
a. Customs Protest Cases
i. Procedure
ii. Case: Nestle Philippines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 134114. July 6, 2001
iii. Concept of Automatic Review
b. Seizure and Forfeiture Cases
i. Proceeding In Rem
ii. Primary Jurisdiction
iii.Search of Dwelling House
iv. Some Illustrative Cases: Mison v. Natividad, GR No. 82526, 11 September 1992;
Provident Tree Farms v. Batario, GR No. 92285, 28 March 1994; Zuno v. Cabredo, A.M.
No. RTJ-03-1779. April 30, 2003
M. Remedies
1. Government
a) Administrative/extrajudicial
(i) Search, seizure, forfeiture, arrest
b) Judicial
(i) Rules on appeal including jurisdiction
2. Taxpayer
a) Protest
b) Abandonment
c) Abatement and refund
Cases:
Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation Vs.
Page 26 of 27
Commission on Customs, GR No. 195876,
December 5, 2016 (abandonment)
END OF OUTLINE
Information regarding Philippine tax laws, issuance and cases can be seen from the following
government websites:
http://www.ntrc.gov.ph/13-tax-laws/120-ra-amendments-to-nirc
http://www.dof.gov.ph/index.php/directory/bureau-of-customs/
www.bir.gov.ph/
Page 27 of 27