Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1963 > May 1963 Decisions > G.R. No. L-18354 May 30, 1963 - CHING BAN YEK CO., INC. v. AUDITOR GENERAL:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-18354. May 30, 1963.]

CHING BAN YEK CO., INC., Petitioner, v. AUDITOR GENERAL, Respondent.

Rafael Dinglasan for Petitioner.

Solicitor General for Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. TAXATION; COTTONSEED OIL; HYDROGENATED COTTONSEED OIL AS COMPONENT NOT STABILIZER, IN THE MANUFACTURE OF VEGETABLE LARD. — The main issue that was submitted to us for consideration is whether or not hydrogenated cottonseed oil when added to coconut oil in the making or preparation of vegetable lard plays the role of a component or ingredient, or merely of a stabilizer as contemplated in Republic Act No. 601, as amended. On this question three divergent opinions were given by three successive heads of the National Institute of Science and Technology, but the opinion which was given weight by respondent Auditor General, which was upheld by this Court, is that of Acting Deputy Commissioner Flaviano M. Yenko of the National Institute of Science and Technology, which was epitomized as follows: "Although hydrogenated cottonseed oil when added to coconut oil in sufficient quantities may change the physical state of the oil by rendering it semi-solid, hydrogenated cottonseed oil does not affect the chemical stability of the oil to which it is added. Hence, in the manufacture of vegetable lard, hydrogenated cottonseed oil serves as a component and not as a stabilizer."


R E S O L U T I O N *


BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:


Petitioner seeks to reconsider our decision rendered on December 29, 1962 on several grounds, among which, is that it is contrary to the legislative intent and runs counter to general welfare and principles of equity which may work hardship and injustice against petitioner and other lard manufacturers.

In support of his motion, petitioner submitted a certificate under oath of Senate President Eulogio Rodriguez, marked as Annex A, the letter of the Chairman of the National Science Development Board, marked as Annex B, the latest opinion of the Deputy Commissioner of the National Institute of Science and Technology, marked as Annex B-1, and the opinion of the American Consultant to said Board from the Armor Research Foundation of the United States, marked as Annex B-2. In addition, petitioner also asked that photostatic copies of pertinent pages of the scientific book entitled "Industrial Oil and Fat Products" by Alton E. Bailey from which Deputy Commissioner Flaviano M. Yenko of the National Institute of Science and Technology quoted the authority for his opinion that "commercial shortening cannot be made out of coconut oil by using 2% or less of hydrogenated cottonseed oil as stearine" which was given in his memorandum to the Chairman of the National Science Development Board dated January 23, 1963, be admitted as evidence in connection with this motion for reconsideration. And during the oral argument held on April 24, 1963, counsel for the petitioner also asked for leave to submit certain documents which he marked as Exhibits AA, BB, X and Y which are all attached to the record.

The main issue that was submitted to us for consideration is whether or not the hydrogenated cottonseed oil when added to coconut oil in the making or preparation of vegetable lard plays the role of a component or ingredient, or merely of a stabilizer as contemplated in Republic Act 601, as amended.

On this question three divergent opinions were given by three successive heads of the National Institute of Science and Technology, but the opinion which was given weight by respondent Auditor General, which was upheld by this Court, is that of acting Deputy Commissioner Flaviano M. Yenko of the National Institute of Science and Technology, which was epitomized as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Although hydrogenated cottonseed oil when added to coconut oil in sufficient qualities may change the physical state of the oil by rendering it semi-solid, hydrogenated cottonseed oil does not affect the chemical stability of the oil to which it is added. Hence in the manufacture of vegetable lard, hydrogenated cottonseed oil serves as a component and not as a stabilizer."cralaw virtua1aw library

In the motion for reconsideration, petitioner now disputes the above opinion by submitting the documents above-mentioned, particularly the new opinion of Deputy Commissioner Yenko from which we quote the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"‘Coconut oil yields a shortening of rather poor plastic range. If coconut oil is to be used in a shortening in large proportions, the product is best made by blending unhydrogenated coconut oil with about 8 to 12% of vegetable stearine and as much cottonseed oil or other liquid oil as may be permissible to use.’

"‘Industrial Oil and Fat Products’, by Alton E. Bailey, 2nd Edition, Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York 1951, p. 214."cralaw virtua1aw library

Since the aforesaid documents are in the nature of new evidence submitted in the case and respondent has not been given an opportunity to examine them nor to cross-examine the persons or officials who appear to be the authors or writers thereof, in order to test their credibility, the Court resolved that, without acting for the present on said motion, the case be remanded to respondent for whatever action he may deem proper to take in the premises.

Bengzon, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.

Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion, JJ., took no part.

Footnote

* Editor’s Note: See main decision in 6 SCRA 1002.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






May-1963 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-20508 May 16, 1963 - GENARO VISARRA v. CESAR MIRAFLOR

  • G.R. No. L-17832-33 May 29, 1963 - ALFONSO CABABA v. BALBINO REMIGIO, ET., AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18884 May 29, 1963 - J. M. TUAZON & Co., INC. v. DANNY VIVAT

  • G.R. No. L-14791 May 30, 1963 - IPEKDJIAN MERCHANDISING CO., INC. v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-16419 May 30, 1963 - ELIZALDE ROPE FACTORY, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-16727 May 30, 1963 - J. M. TUASON & CO. v. RICARDO BALOY

  • G.R. No. L-16774 May 30, 1963 - EUGENIO URBAYAN v. EVARISTO SALVORO

  • G.R. No. L-16782 May 30, 1963 - SILVESTRE CUÑADO v. DAVID GAMUS

  • G.R. No. L-17060 May 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. KUSAIN SAIK, ET., AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17568 May 30, 1963 - EMILIO M. LUMONTAD, JR. v. PROVINCIAL GOVERNOR

  • G.R. No. L-17662 May 30, 1963 - SAN TEODORO DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES, INC. v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

  • G.R. No. L-17907 May 30, 1963 - JOAQUIN HACBANG v. THE LEYTE AUTOBUS CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-17983 May 30, 1963 - LEONCIO SOLEDAD v. PAULO MAMAÑGUN

  • G.R. No. L-18226 May 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENCIO SANTOK

  • G.R. No. L-18354 May 30, 1963 - CHING BAN YEK CO., INC. v. AUDITOR GENERAL

  • G.R. No. L-20420 May 30, 1963 - BOTELHO SHIPPING CORP. v. JOSE N. LEUTERIO

  • G.R. No. L-11843 May 31, 1963 - DAVAO CITY WOMEN’S CLUB, INC. v. REMEDIOS PONFERRADA

  • G.R. No. L-14760 May 31, 1963 - ANTONIO M. SAMIA v. ROMAN REYES

  • G.R. No. L-15184 May 31, 1963 - SAURA IMPORT & EXPORT CO., INC. v. PHILIPPINE INTERNATIONAL SURETY CO., INC.

  • G.R. Nos. L-15201-02 May 31, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. POLICARPIO TIONGSON

  • G.R. No. L-15237 May 31, 1963 - MARIA SANTIAGO, ET AL., v. JOSE RAMIREZ, ET AL.,

  • G.R. No. L-15290 May 31, 1963 - MARIANO ZAMORA v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-15972 May 31, 1963 - CONCEPCION ASETRE MOTOOMULL v. ABUNDIO Z. ARRIETA

  • G.R. No. L-15982 May 31, 1963 - MARINDUQUE IRON MINES AGENTS, INC. v. SECRETARY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNICATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-16610 May 31, 1963 - FRANCISCA JOVELO v. NAZARIA VDA. DE BAUTISTA

  • G.R. No. L-16870 May 31, 1963 - ELOY PROSPERO v. ALFREDO ROBLES, ET., AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16894 May 31, 1963 - MODESTA VDA. DE SANTOS v. DANIEL GARCIA

  • G.R. No. L-17569 May 31, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL SAMIA, ET AL.,

  • G.R. No. L-17912 May 31, 1963 - MELANIO OLANO v. DOMINADOR RONQUILLO, ET., AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18043 May 31, 1963 - NATIONAL WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITY v. GREGORIO D. MONTEJO

  • G.R. Nos. L-18083-84 May 31, 1963 - JESUS Z. VALENZUELA v. IRENE Z. DE AGUILAR

  • G.R. No. L-18085 May 31, 1963 - ANACLETO B. ALZATE v. BENIGNO ALDANA

  • G.R. No. L-18125 May 31, 1963 - BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, PROVINCE OF LAGUNA v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-18270 May 31, 1963 - SAN PABLO OIL FACTORY, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-18319 May 31, 1963 - LEONCIO NGO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18336 May 31, 1963 - MAGDALENA ESTATE, INC. v. KAPISANAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA MAGDALENA ESTATE, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-18365 May 31, 1963 - GEORGE DE BISSCHOP v. EMILIO L. GALANG

  • G.R. No. L-18629 May 31, 1963 - NEGROS NAVIGATION CO., INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18728 May 31, 1963 - PHIL. NATIONAL BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.,

  • G.R. No. L-18943 May 31, 1963 - RAMON YAP v. FORTUNATA TINGIN, ET AL.,

  • G.R. No. L-19146 May 31, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO SARMIENTO

  • G.R. No. L-19247 May 31, 1963 - INSULAR SUGAR REFINING CORP. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-19258 May 31, 1963 - MANILA YACHT CLUB, INC. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-21098 May 31, 1963 - CARMEN P. NOVINO v. COURT OF APPEALS