Case Digest (G.R. No. 190487)
Facts:
Bureau of Customs v. Peter Sherman, Michael Whelan, Teodoro B. Lingan, Atty. Ofelia B. Cajigal and the Court of Tax Appeals, G.R. No. 190487, April 13, 2011, Supreme Court Third Division, Carpio Morales, J., writing for the Court.From June 2005 to January 2007, Mark Sensing Philippines, Inc. (MSPI) imported finished printed bet slips (255,870 pieces) and rolls of thermal paper (205,200 rolls) from Australia and caused their movement from the Clark Special Economic Zone (CSEZ) to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) for lotto operations in Luzon. MSPI did not pay duties and taxes on these shipments. Under its Run After The Smugglers (RATS) Program, the Bureau of Customs (BOC) filed a criminal complaint through designated agents against MSPI officers and its customs brokers for violations of Section 3601 in relation to Sections 2530(f) and (l)5 and Section 101(f) of the Tariff and Customs Code, as amended, and Republic Act No. 7916.
State Prosecutor Rohaira Lao‑Tamano, by resolution dated March 25, 2008, found probable cause and recommended filing of an information. While respondents sought relief with the Secretary of Justice, an Information was nevertheless filed on April 11, 2009 before the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) Second Division charging 40 unlawful importations valued at US$1,240,880.14 with alleged unpaid duties of about Php15,917,611.83; warrants were served only on respondents Cajigal and Lingan, who posted bail.
On March 20, 2009 the Secretary of Justice reversed the State Prosecutor’s finding and directed withdrawal of the Information; the BOC’s motion for reconsideration was denied on April 29, 2009 and BOC elevated the matter by petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals (CA GR SP No. 10‑9431). Meanwhile Prosecutor Lao‑Tamano filed before the CTA a Motion to Withdraw Information with Leave of Court; BOC opposed, and respondents moved to dismiss. The CTA, by Resolution dated September 3, 2009, granted the withdrawal and dismissed the Information. BOC’s motion for reconsideration was “noted without actio...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Tax Appeals commit grave abuse of discretion in granting the State Prosecutor’s Motion to Withdraw the Information and dismissing the case?
- May the Bureau of Customs, as private complainant, pursue or compel prosecution independently (or have its motion for reconsideration acted upon) without the approval and contro...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)