Case Digest (G.R. No. L-17097)
Facts:
- The case involves the Philippine Acetylene Company (plaintiff-appellee) seeking the recovery of taxes paid to the Central Bank of the Philippines (defendant-appellant) for the importation of skid tanks used in the packaging and distribution of liquefied petroleum gas.
- The skid tanks were imported by the plaintiff for transporting and storing the gas, which it bought from Caltex for sale to its customers.
- The plaintiff requested a refund of the taxes, arguing that the tax had been collected on accessories or equipment for use in an industry.
- The refund was denied, leading to the present action.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Manila court of first instance ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the Central Bank to return the taxes collected....(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The court determined that the plaintiff is engaged in the industry of manufacturing and selling acetylene gas, oxygen gas, and other gases.
- While it does not manufacture liquefied petroleum gas, it imports the skid tanks for transporting and storing the gas.
- The Central Bank argued that the plaintiff is not engaged in an industry for which the skid tanks are indispensable, as it is merely a merchant using the tanks in its business.
- However, the court disagreed and held that the plaintiff is actually engaged in the manufacture of gases and in the packaging and distribution of liquefied petroleum gas.
- It noted that the handling of petroleum gas through skid tanks requires technical skill and ingenuity, making it an industry rather...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-17097)
Facts:
In September 1955, the Philippine Acetylene Company paid taxes on foreign exchange to the Central Bank of the Philippines for the importation of ten skid tanks or cylinders used for transporting and storing liquefied petroleum gas. The plaintiff applied the taxes paid to the payment of costs, transportation, and other charges related to the importation of the skid tanks. The plaintiff later requested a refund of the taxes, arguing that the skid tanks should be exempt from taxation as accessories or equipment used in an industry. However, the refund was denied, and the plaintiff filed a civil action to recover the taxes collected without authority of law.
Issue:
The main issue raised in the case is whether the skid tanks ...