Case Digest (G.R. No. 23985)
Facts:
Pampanga Sugar Mills v. Wenceslao Trinidad, G.R. No. 23985, February 02, 1928, the Supreme Court En Banc, Ostrand, J., writing for the Court. The appellant, Pampanga Sugar Mills (plaintiff below), sued Wenceslao Trinidad, Collector of Internal Revenue for the Philippine Islands (defendant below and appellee), to recover P60,911.42 paid as merchant’s percentage taxes allegedly levied under section 1459 of the Administrative Code of 1917 (Act No. 2711).The parties submitted an agreed statement of facts to the Court of First Instance. The stipulation established that Pampanga Sugar Mills operated a sugar mill at Del Carmen, Pampanga and, under milling contracts with sugarcane growers, received one-half of the centrifugal sugar produced from cane delivered by growers. The stipulation enumerated the gross sales value of the mill’s share of sugar for eight quarterly periods from July 1, 1920 to June 30, 1922, and showed that the Collector assessed and collected a one per cent (1%) merchant’s percentage tax on those sales, which the mill paid under protest.
The plaintiff filed its complaint on September 14, 1922, seeking recovery of the taxes paid; the Collector answered admitting the factual allegations but pleaded that the plaintiff was a manufacturer and therefore subject to taxation under section 1459. The Court of First Instance, construing the stipulation as like the facts in Central Azucarera de Bais v. Trinidad (46 Phil. 492), sustained the Collector’s assessment and ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Under the Administrative Code of 1917, was Pampanga Sugar Mills a “merchant” (including a manufacturer) subject to the one per cent merchant’s percentage tax of section 1459?
- If so, was the sugar sold by the mill nonetheless exempt under section 1460(b) as “agricultural products when sold by the producer or owner of the land where grown, or by any other person other than ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)