Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1969 > September 1969 Decisions > G.R. No. L-23123 September 30, 1969 - HEALD LUMBER COMPANY v. BENJAMIN N. TABIOS:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-23123. September 30, 1969.]

HEALD LUMBER COMPANY, Petitioner, v. BENJAMIN N. TABIOS, in his capacity as COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

Ross, Salcedo, Del Rosario, Bito & Misa for Petitioner.

Solicitor General Arturo A. Alafriz, Solicitor Alejandro B. Afurong and Special Atty. Oscar S. de Castro for Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. TAXATION; NATIONAL INTERNAL REVENUE CODE; INCOME TAX; INTEREST ON DEFICIENCY TAX; CASE OF CENTRAL AZUCARERA DE SAN PEDRO VS. CTA APPLIED. — Pursuant to a revised assessment issued by respondent Commissioner on November 24, 1961, of deficiency income tax for 1953, petitioner paid the principal amount but refused to pay the interest thereon of 1/2%, monthly from June 20, 1959 to November 24, 1961. The Court of Tax Appeals held petitioner liable for such interest covering said period. HELD: The decision of the Court of Tax Appeals should be affirmed, following the ruling in the case of Central Azucarrera de San Pedro v. Court of Tax Appeals, Et Al., that the interest of six (6%) per annum (or 1/2% monthly interest), provided for in Section 51(d) of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 2343 is imposable on deficiency income tax due on income earned prior to the effectivity of said Republic Act No. 2343, but assessed after it.


D E C I S I O N


MAKALINTAL, J.:


This is a petition for review of the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals in CTA Case No. 1222 and of the resolution of said court denying petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. The appealed decision — affirming respondents’ assessment — held petitioner liable for the payment of the sum of P2,362.57 is 1/2% monthly interest from June 20, 1959 to November 24, 1961 on the amount of P16,219.00, the deficiency income tax for 1953 admittedly due from petitioner.

The material facts are not controverted. On February 25, 1959 respondent originally assessed against petitioner the sum of P41,040.00 as deficiency income tax for 1953. Upon petitioner’s request for reconsideration, respondent issued on November 24, 1961 a revised assessment in the reduced amount of P16,219.00, plus the aforementioned interest of P2,362.57. Although petitioner paid the principal amount as thus revised, it refused to pay the interest thereon, claiming that the same was without legal basis. Respondent maintained that the 1/2% monthly interest was imposed pursuant to section 51(d) of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 2343, * which took effect on June 20, 1959. Petitioner elevated the case to the Court of Tax Appeals, which on March 23, 1964 rendered the decision now subject of review.

The issue presented is not a novel one. In an earlier case decided by this Court where the same question was raised (Central Azucarera de San Pedro v. Court of Tax Appeals and Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. Nos. L-23236 and 23254, May 31, 1967; 20 SCRA 344) this Court, speaking through Mr. Justice J.B.L. Reyes, stated:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The common issue posed in both cases is: whether or not the interest of six per centum (6%) per annum (or 1/2% monthly interest), provided for in Section 51(d) of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 2343 (effective June 20, 1959) is imposable on deficiency income tax due on income earned prior to the effectivity of said Republic Act No. 2343, but assessed after it."cralaw virtua1aw library

x       x       x


"From a perusal and comparison of the abovequoted sections of the Tax Code, before and after amendment, it will be observed that, although the Commissioner (formerly Collector) of Internal Revenue, under the old Section 51 (a) was required to assess the tax due, based on the taxpayer’s return and notify the taxpayer of said assessment, still under subsection (b) of the same old Section 51, the time prescribed for the payment of tax was fixed, whether or not a notice of the assessment was given to the taxpayer. Under the new provision, the time of payment is also fixed and pre- determined (usually coinciding with the filing of the return) without the necessity of giving notification of the assessment to the taxpayer by the Commissioner.

"It should further be observed that, under the old Section 51(e) the interest on deficiency was imposed from the time the tax become due; while under the new Section 51(d), said interest is imposed on the deficiency from the date prescribed for the payment of the tax.

"It is thus evident that petitioner’s contention that ‘interest on such deficiency accrued only when the taxpayer failed to pay the tax within the period prescribed therefor by respondent (Commissioner of Internal Revenue)’ is not correct; said interest was imposable in case of non-payment on time, not only on the basic income tax, but also on the deficiency tax since the deficiency was part and parcel of petitioner’s income tax liability.

"It appearing that the new Section 51(d) under Republic Act 2343 expressly provides that the interest on deficiency shall be assessed at the same time as the deficiency income tax; and that respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue imposed and sought to collect the interest only from June 20, 1959, which was the date of effectivity of said Republic Act No. 2343; that the deficiency income taxes in question were assessed and unpaid when said Act was already in force, the Tax Court correctly held that said Section 51(d), as amended, is not being applied retroactively as contended by petitioner herein.

"Moreover, the application of said Section 51(d), as amended, in the cases at bar, operated and worked in favor of petitioner- appellant, since instead of imposing the rate of one per centum (1%) monthly interest prescribed in the old Section (51)(e) from the time the tax became due, (1953, 1954, 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958 in the instant case) respondent Commissioner merely imposed the new 1/2% monthly interest from January 20, 1959, which interests, as computed are less than what would be due under the old law."cralaw virtua1aw library

The foregoing decision in the Central Azucarera case is squarely applicable in the one at bar, the material facts and legal issues being similar.

WHEREFORE, the decision is hereby affirmed. Costs against petitioner.

Concepcion, C.J., Dizon, Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Capistrano, Teehankee and Barredo, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



* Section 51(d) as amended by Republic Act No. 2343 reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Sec. 51. Payment and assessment of income tax. . . . (d) Interest on deficiency. — Interest upon the amount determined as a deficiency shall be assessed at the same time as the deficiency and shall be paid upon notice and demand from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue; and shall be collected as part of the tax, at the rate of six per centum per annum from the date prescribed for the payment of the tax (or, if the tax is paid in installments, from the date prescribed for the payment of the first installment) to the date the deficiency is assessed: Provided, That the maximum amount that may be collected as interest on deficiency shall in no case exceed the amount corresponding to a period of three years, the present provisions regarding prescription to the contrary notwithstanding."




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






September-1969 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-27159 September 17, 1969 - IN RE: TERESITA CHAN, ET AL. v. LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF MANILA

  • G.R. No. L-24334 September 30, 1969 - CONCEPCION CORNELIO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22355 September 30, 1969 - ANTOLIN GALENO v. REINERIO TICAO

  • G.R. No. L-23032 September 30, 1969 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. LEOPOLDO C. PALAD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24308 September 30, 1969 - LEOPOLDO VENCILAO v. CLETO CAMARENTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24491 September 30, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUFINO GENSOLA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26079 September 30, 1969 - PORFIRIO COMIA, ET AL. v. NICANOR P. NICOLAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27549 September 30, 1969 - JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29675 September 30, 1969 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL. v. PIO R. MARCOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29743 September 30, 1969 - BLUE BAR WORKERS’ UNION v. LAKAS NG MANGGAGAWANG MAKABAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25989 September 30, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARMINGOL Y. HANASAN

  • G.R. No. L-21551 September 30, 1969 - FERNANDEZ HERMANOS, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29381 September 30, 1969 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL RAILWAYS, ET AL. v. VALERIANO A. DEL VALLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23670 September 30, 1969 - ANGEL ENCISO v. DEOGRACIAS REMO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23849 September 30, 1969 - VIRGILIO M. LAYNO v. I & I EQUIP. & SERVICE CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24476 September 30, 1969 - PATRICIO G. DUMLAO v. RAMON A. DIAZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26386 September 30, 1969 - PROVIDENCE WASHINGTON INS. CO. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19337 September 30, 1969 - ASTURIAS SUGAR CENTRAL, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26844 September 30, 1969 - FELIPE DE LEON, ET AL. v. PAMPANGA SUGAR

  • G.R. No. L-23081 September 30, 1969 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. ILAGAN ELECTRIC & ICE PLANT, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24794 September 30, 1969 - ISABEL G. CABUNGCAL, ET AL. v. TEOFISTO M. CORDOVA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25743 September 30, 1969 - NATIONAL MKTG. CORP., ET AL. v. FRANCISCO ARCA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26371 September 30, 1969 - MOBIL OIL PHIL., INC. v. RUTH R. DIOCARES, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-27615-16 September 30, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO BARBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29177 September 30, 1969 - ERNESTO VILLALON v. ABUNDIO Z. ARRIETA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23123 September 30, 1969 - HEALD LUMBER COMPANY v. BENJAMIN N. TABIOS

  • G.R. No. L-23710 September 30, 1969 - ANTONIO PAREDES, ET AL. v. SIMEON M. GOPENGCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-26611-12 September 30, 1969 - DOLORES NERIA, ET AL. v. MARTINIANO P. VIVO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30069 September 30, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANASTACIO BULAWIN

  • A.C. No. 652 September 30, 1969 - HIPOLITO BALBARONA v. HERMINIO SANTOS

  • A.C. No. 812 September 30, 1969 - GREGORIO CONDE v. NICOLAS SUPERABLE, JR., ET AL.