Title
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Cebu Portland Cement Co.
Case
G.R. No. L-29059
Decision Date
Dec 15, 1987
Cement deemed manufactured, subject to sales tax; CIR's enforcement via distraint upheld despite protest; assessment not time-barred due to unfiled returns.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-29059)

Facts:

  • Prior proceedings
    • In 1961, the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) ordered the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) to refund ₱359,408.98 representing overpayments of ad valorem taxes by Cebu Portland Cement Co. (CEPOC).
    • The Supreme Court modified that decision on February 27, 1965.
  • Execution and objections
    • On March 28, 1968, after denial of motions for reconsideration, CEPOC moved for a writ of execution to enforce the refund.
    • The CIR opposed, asserting CEPOC had an outstanding sales tax liability of ₱4,789,279.85 plus 28% surcharge, to which the refund should be credited.
    • On April 22, 1968, the CTA granted execution, holding the sales tax liability still under question and not subject to set-off.
  • Contentions on classification and prescription
    • CIR argued cement is a manufactured product under Section 186 of the Tax Code, not a mineral product, and that distraint powers (Secs. 316, 318) and the prohibition on injunctions (Sec. 305) allowed immediate collection.
    • CEPOC contended cement is a mineral product exempt from sales tax under Section 188 after Republic Act No. 1299 (June 16, 1955), that its sales tax assessments were not final and were filed under protest, and that the five-year prescriptive period had already lapsed from filing returns.
    • The CTA’s decision in Cebu Portland Cement Co. v. Collector (1968, 28 SCRA 789) was interpreted to imply that RA 1299 reclassified cement as a mineral product not subject to sales tax.

Issues:

  • Whether the ₱359,408.98 refund should be credited against CEPOC’s sales tax deficiency.
  • Whether cement is a manufactured product subject to sales tax under Section 186 rather than a mineral product under Section 246/188.
  • Whether the sales tax assessments against CEPOC have prescribed.
  • Whether an injunction or withholding execution of refund is permissible pending resolution of the sales tax liability.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.