Case Digest (G.R. No. 25846)
Facts:
- Parties Involved: Plaintiff-appellee Juan Camahort, employed by Doña Marcelina O. Viuda de Monasterio, and defendant-appellant Juan Posadas, Jr., Collector of Internal Revenue.
- Employment Details: Camahort was hired as a commercial traveler with a fixed salary of P300 per month to sell Monasterio's goods.
- Sales Activity: From 1918 to 1922, Camahort sold goods amounting to P217,436.74 in Manila, always disclosing Monasterio's name in transactions.
- Tax Payments: Monasterio paid the merchant's percentage tax on these sales as required by law.
- Additional Taxes Levied: On October 11, 1922, Posadas levied additional taxes on Camahort, including fixed C-1 taxes for 1918-1922, a 1% tax on gross sales, and a 25% surcharge for delinquency, totaling P2,727.96.
- Protest and Refund: Camahort paid these taxes under protest and sought a refund, which was denied.
- Lower Court Ruling: The lower court ruled in favor of Camahort, ordering a refund of the taxes paid.
- Appeal: Posadas appealed, arguing that Camahort was a commission merchant and should be liable for the taxes.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- Commercial Broker: The Supreme Court ruled that Camahort was acting as a commercial broker and not as a merchant.
- No Double Sales Tax: The Court determined that...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- Ownership of Goods: Doña Marcelina O. Viuda de Monasterio was the sole owner of the goods, with Camahort acting solely as her agent and legal representative.
- Sales Conduct: All sales were made in Monasterio's name and for her account, with Camahort earning a fixed salary and no additional compensation.
- Tax Payments: Monasterio had already paid the full sales tax on the goods sold.
- No Consignment or Commission: Camahort did not take the goods on consignment or commission.
- Single Sale: The Court con...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 25846)
Facts:
In the case of "Camahort v. Posadas, Jr.," the plaintiff-appellee, Juan Camahort, a resident of Manila, was employed by Doña Marcelina O. Viuda de Monasterio from San Jose, formerly Province of Ambos Camarines, under a written instrument dated November 4, 1918. Camahort was employed as a commercial traveler with a fixed salary of P300 per month to sell and dispose of goods belonging to Monasterio. During the years 1918 to 1922, Camahort sold goods amounting to P217,436.74 in Manila, always disclosing his employer's name in all transactions. The merchant's percentage tax on these sales, as required under section 1459 of the Administrative Code of 1917, was paid by Monasterio. However, on October 11, 1922, the defendant-appellant, Juan Posadas, Jr., the Collector of Internal Revenue, levied additional taxes on Camahort, including fixed C-1 taxes for 1918-1922, a 1% tax on gross sales, and a 25% surcharge for delinquency, totaling P2,727.96. Camahort paid these taxes under protest and sought a refund, which was denied. The lower court ruled ...