G.R. No. 63796-97 - La Chemise Lacoste, S.A. vs. Ferdez

The petitioner is Filipinas Life Assurance Company, a domestic life insurance company.
The respondents include the Court of Tax Appeals and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

In its original 1958 income tax return filed on March 18, 1959, the petitioner reported:

Gross income from interest: P5,186.44
Gross income from dividends: P57,105.29
Total gross income: P62,202.36
Total deductions: P10,317.47
Resulting in net income of P51,974.89 and a tax assessable (under rules for life insurance companies) of P3,378.00.

The dividend income reported was reduced to 25% (P15,242.55) of the originally reported amount.
Consequently, the total gross income decreased to P20,186.44, with net income amounting to P10,111.52.
The tax assessable under the life insurance provisions was recalculated at P657.00, resulting in an overpayment of tax.

The petitioner claimed a refund of P2,721.00, representing the excess tax paid (P3,378.00 minus P657.00).
The claim was initially filed with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, but due to the absence of a response, the petitioner pursued the matter before the Court of Tax Appeals.
The Tax Court, with a divided vote (two members voting and one reserving vote), upheld the timeliness of the petitioner's action yet denied the refund based on their interpretation of tax provisions.

The case centers on Section 24 of the National Internal Revenue Code and its series of amendments, particularly the 1957 amendment which restructured the section into sub-sections (A) and (B).
Under the amended provisions:

Sub-section (A) deals with the tax imposed on corporations in general, including a proviso that only 25% of dividend income shall be returnable for tax purposes.
Sub-section (B) sets forth the tax rate for life insurance companies, which are to be taxed on their total investment income at a lower rate (6½%).

The petitioner contended that the historical application of the dividend exclusion extended to all domestic and resident foreign corporations, including life insurance companies.

Whether domestic and resident foreign life insurance companies are entitled to the benefit of reporting only 25% of their dividend income, as provided by the dividend exclusion clause in the National Internal Revenue Code.

Whether the dividend exclusion proviso, though positioned in sub-section (A) of Section 24, should be applied to domestic and resident foreign life insurance companies that are taxed under sub-section (B).
Whether the legislative history and policy objectives underlying the 1957 amendment support the extension of dividend exclusion benefits to life insurance companies.
Whether a strict syntactical or grammatical interpretation of the statutory division within Section 24 can override the evident legislative intent to afford preferential treatment to such companies.