The Supreme Court ruled that Section 11 of Revenue Regulation No. 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" of Revenue Memorandum Circular 90-2012 were null and void. These regulations contravened the Sin Tax Reform Law of 2012 by imposing excise tax on individual cigarette pouches of 5's and 10's, rather than only on packaging combinations of 20 cigarettes as authorized by the law. The Court held that an administrative issuance cannot amend the law it seeks to implement, and the BIR exceeded its authority by creating additional tax liability not allowed under the statute. Excise tax shall only be imposed on packaging combinations of 20 cigarette sticks as a whole.
The Supreme Court ruled that Section 11 of Revenue Regulation No. 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" of Revenue Memorandum Circular 90-2012 were null and void. These regulations contravened the Sin Tax Reform Law of 2012 by imposing excise tax on individual cigarette pouches of 5's and 10's, rather than only on packaging combinations of 20 cigarettes as authorized by the law. The Court held that an administrative issuance cannot amend the law it seeks to implement, and the BIR exceeded its authority by creating additional tax liability not allowed under the statute. Excise tax shall only be imposed on packaging combinations of 20 cigarette sticks as a whole.
Original Description:
8. Purisima v. Philippine Tobacco Institute, Inc. Digest
The Supreme Court ruled that Section 11 of Revenue Regulation No. 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" of Revenue Memorandum Circular 90-2012 were null and void. These regulations contravened the Sin Tax Reform Law of 2012 by imposing excise tax on individual cigarette pouches of 5's and 10's, rather than only on packaging combinations of 20 cigarettes as authorized by the law. The Court held that an administrative issuance cannot amend the law it seeks to implement, and the BIR exceeded its authority by creating additional tax liability not allowed under the statute. Excise tax shall only be imposed on packaging combinations of 20 cigarette sticks as a whole.
The Supreme Court ruled that Section 11 of Revenue Regulation No. 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" of Revenue Memorandum Circular 90-2012 were null and void. These regulations contravened the Sin Tax Reform Law of 2012 by imposing excise tax on individual cigarette pouches of 5's and 10's, rather than only on packaging combinations of 20 cigarettes as authorized by the law. The Court held that an administrative issuance cannot amend the law it seeks to implement, and the BIR exceeded its authority by creating additional tax liability not allowed under the statute. Excise tax shall only be imposed on packaging combinations of 20 cigarette sticks as a whole.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2
8. Purisima v. Philippine Tobacco Institute, Inc.
G.R. 210251 April 17, 2017
Carpio, J. Petition for review on certiorari assailing RTC decision. Facts: - On Dec 20 2012, Pres. Aquino signed the Sin Tax Reform law, which restructured the excise tax on alcohol and tobacco products by amending pertinent provision of NIRC. - Sec. 5 of said law, amended Sec. 145 (C) of NIRC, increased the excise tax rate of cigars and cigarettes and allowed cigarettes packed by machine to be packed in other packaging combinations of not more than 20. - On Dec 21 2012, the Sec. of Finance, upon recommendation of CIR, issued RR 17-2012, which imposes an excise tax on individual cigarette pouches of 5’s and 10’s even if they are bundled or packed in packaging combinations not exceeding 20 cigarettes. Pursuant to this, the CIR issued RMC 90-202 which provide for the initial classifications in tabular form, of locally manufactured cigarette brands packed by machine according to tax rates under RA 10351 based on 1)2010 BIR price survey of these products and 2) suggested net retail price. - PMFTC, a member of respondent PTI, paid the excise tax required under RA 10351, RR 17-2012, and RMC 90-2012 in order to withdraw cigarettes from its manufacturing facilities. But, on Jan 16 2012, PMFTC wrote to CIR prior to the payment of the excise tax that payment was being made under protest and without prejudice to its right to question said issuances thru remedies available under the law. - Now on Feb 26 2013, PTI filed a petition for declaratory relief with an application for writ of preliminary injunction with the RTC, which sought to have RR 17-2012 and RMC 90- 2012 declared null and void for allegedly violating the Constitution and imposing tax rates not authorized by RA 10351; that the excise tax rate of either P12 or P25 should be imposed only on cigars packed by machine in packs of 20s or packaging combinations of 20’s and should not be imposed on cigarette pouches of 5’s and 10’s. RTC granted the petition for declaratory relief. - Hence, this petition filed by Sec. of Finance and the CIR thru the OSG. - Meanwhile, this court issued a temporary restraining order against PTI and the RTC. Issue: 1. Is Section 11 of Revenue Regulation No. 17-2012 issued on authority of RA, 10351, otherwise known as the Sin Tax Reform Law of 2012? Ruling: No. In this case, Section 11 of RR 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" on Cigarettes Packed by Machine of RMC 90-2012 clearly contravened the provisions of RA 10351. It is a well-settled principle that a revenue regulation cannot amend the law it seeks to implement. In Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Seagate Technology (Philippines), we held that a mere administrative issuance, like a BIR regulation, cannot amend the law; the former cannot purport to do any more than implement the latter. The courts will not countenance an administrative regulation that overrides the statute it seeks to implement. In the present case, a reading of Section 11 of RR 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" on Cigarettes Packed by Machine of RMC 90-2012 reveals that they are not simply regulations to implement RA 10351. They are amendatory provisions which require cigarette manufacturers to be liable to pay for more tax than the law, RA 10351, allows. The BIR, in issuing these revenue regulations, created an additional tax liability for packaging combinations smaller than 20 cigarette sticks. In so doing, the BIR amended the law, an act beyond the power of the BIR to do. In sum, we agree with the ruling of the RTC that Section 11 of RR 17-2012 and Annex "D-1" on Cigarettes Packed by Machine of RMC 90-2012 are null and void. Excise tax on cigarettes packed by machine shall be imposed on the packaging combination of 20 cigarette sticks as a whole and not to individual packaging combinations or pouches of 5's, 10's, etc.
Chico-Nazario, J.: For Resolution Is The Omnibus Motion (1) Filed by The Land Bank of The Philippines (LBP) For (A) The Reconsideration of The Decision Dated 6 February