LEX SCEPTICUS

Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Burroughs Limited and the Court of Tax Appeals  GR No L-66653                                                                          June 19, 1986 Facts: Burroughs Limited is a foreign corporation authorized to engage in trade or business in the Philippines through a branch office located at De la Rosa corner Esteban Streets, Legaspi Village, Makati, Metro Manila. Claiming that the 15% profit remittance tax should have been computed on the basis of the amount actually remitted (P6,499,999.30) and not on the amount before profit remittance tax (P7,647,058.00), private respondent filed on December 24, 1980, a written claim for the refund or tax credit of the amount of P172,058.90 representing alleged overpaid branch profit remittance tax. Issue: Whether or not Burroughs is entitled to any tax credit. Whether or not Memorandum Circular No. 8-82 should be given a retroactive effect? Ruling: Yes. Respondent concedes at least that

Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority vs Marcos, et al., GR No 120082                                                 September 11, 1996 Facts: Petitioner Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA) was created by virtue of Republic Act No. 6958, mandated to “principally undertake the economical, efficient and effective control, management and supervision of the Mactan International Airport in the Province of Cebu and the Lahug Airport in Cebu City, and such other airports as may be established in the Province of Cebu. Since the time of its creation, petitioner MCIAA enjoyed the privilege of exemption from payment of realty taxes in accordance with Section 14 of its Charter: "Sec. 14. Tax Exemptions. -- The Authority shall be exempt from realty taxes imposed by the National Government or any of its political subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities." On October 11, 1994, however, the Office of the Treasurer of the City of Cebu, demanded payme

Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Central Luzon Drug Corporation G.R. No. 159647                                                     April 15, 2005 Facts: Respondents operated six drugstores under the business name Mercury Drug. From January to December 1996 respondent granted 20% sales discount to qualified senior citizens on their purchases of medicines pursuant to RA 7432 for a total of ₱ 904,769. On April 15, 1997, respondent filed its annual Income Tax Return for taxable year 1996 declaring therein net losses. On Jan. 16, 1998 respondent filed with petitioner a claim for tax refund/credit of ₱ 904,769.00 allegedly arising from the 20% sales discount. Unable to obtain affirmative response from petitioner, respondent elevated its claim to the Court of Tax Appeals. The court dismissed the same but upon reconsideration, the latter reversed its earlier ruling and ordered petitioner to issue a Tax Credit Certificate in favor of respondent citing CA GR SP No. 60057 (May 31, 20

ABAKADA Guro Party List vs. Ermita G.R. No. 168056                                       September 1, 2005 Facts: ABAKADA GURO Party List, et al., filed a petition for prohibition o questioning the constitutionality of Sections 4, 5 and 6 of R.A. No. 9337, amending Sections 106, 107 and 108, respectively, of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC).  Section 4 imposes a 10% VAT on sale of goods and properties; Section 5 imposes a 10% VAT on importation of goods; and Section 6 imposes a 10% VAT on sale of services and use or lease of properties; These provisions contain a provision which authorizing the President, upon recommendation of the Secretary of Finance, to raise the VAT rate to 12%, effective January 1, 2006, after specified conditions have been satisfied. Issues: Whether or not there is a violation of Article VI, Section 24 of the Constitution. Whether or not there is undue delegation of legislative power in violation of Article VI Sec 28(2) of the

Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Algue Inc., and Court of Tax Appeals GR No. L-28896                                        February 17, 1988 Facts: The Philippine Sugar Estate Development Company had earlier appointed Algue Inc., as its agent, authorizing it to sell its land, factories and oil manufacturing process.As such,the corporation worked for the formation of the Vegetable Oil Investment Corporation, until they were able to purchased the PSEDC properties. For this sale, Algue Inc., received as agent a commission of P126, 000.00, and it was from this commission that the P75, 000.00 promotional fees were paid to Alberto Guevara, Jr., Eduardo Guevara, Isabel Guevara, Edith, O'Farell, and Pablo Sanchez. Commissioner of Internal Revenue contends that the claimed deduction is not allowed because it was not an ordinary reasonable or necessary business expense. The Court of Tax Appeals had seen it differently. Agreeing with Algue Inc., it held that the said amount h