Case Digest (G.R. No. 220598)
Facts:
On 20 October 2001, Swedish Match Philippines, Inc. (petitioner) remitted a total of ₱470,932.21 in local business taxes to the City of Manila under Sections 14 and 21 of the Manila Revenue Code, amending Ordinance Nos. 7988 and 8011. Of this amount, ₱164,552.04 corresponded to the levy under Section 21. Asserting that payment under Section 21 resulted in double taxation, petitioner wrote the City Treasurer on 17 September 2003 to demand a refund. When no action was taken, it filed a Petition for Refund of Taxes with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 21, on 17 October 2003 (Civil Case No. 03-108163). On 14 June 2004, the RTC dismissed the petition for failure to plead corporate capacity and to prove the authority of Tiarra T. Batilaran-Beleno (Finance Manager) who signed the Verification and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping. The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) Second Division and, subsequently, the CTA En Banc affirmed the dismissal on the same ground. Thereafter, pCase Digest (G.R. No. 220598)
Facts:
- Payment of business taxes and refund claim
- On 20 October 2001, petitioner paid P470,932.21 in business taxes under Sections 14 and 21 of Manila Revenue Code as amended; P164,552.04 corresponded to Section 21.
- On 17 September 2003, petitioner wrote the City Treasurer claiming refund of Section 21 payments as constituting double taxation vis-à-vis Section 14.
- RTC proceedings
- On 17 October 2003, petitioner filed a Petition for Refund of Taxes with RTC Manila (Civil Case No. 03-108163) under LGC §196.
- On 14 June 2004, RTC Branch 21 dismissed the petition for failure to allege corporate capacity to sue and to prove authority of Finance Manager Tiarra T. Batilaran-Beleno to sign verification; denied reconsideration and held Sections 14 and 21 taxes to be of different nature.
- CTA proceedings
- On petition, CTA Second Division affirmed dismissal for lack of proof of Beleno’s authority.
- On further appeal, CTA En Banc denied the petition for review, affirming that the unaccompanied certification of non-forum shopping was defective.
- Supreme Court petition
- Petitioner filed a Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari assailing CTA En Banc Decision dated 1 October 2007 and Resolution dated 14 January 2008.
Issues:
- Whether Ms. Beleno was authorized to file the Petition for Refund of Taxes with the RTC.
- Whether imposition of tax under Section 21 of Manila Revenue Code constitutes double taxation in view of tax collected and paid under Section 14 of the same code.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)