Title
Tan vs. Del Rosario, Jr.
Case
G.R. No. 109289
Decision Date
Oct 3, 1994
A taxpayer and law firm challenged RA 7496's constitutionality and its implementing regulation, alleging violations of uniformity, equity, due process, and single-subject rule. The Court upheld the law and regulation, ruling they comply with constitutional requirements and do not exceed rule-making authority.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 109289)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Petitions
    • Rufino R. Tan (G.R. No. 109289) and Carag, Caballes, Jamora & Somera Law Offices et al. (G.R. No. 109446) filed consolidated special civil actions for prohibition.
    • Respondents are Ramon R. del Rosario, Jr., Secretary of Finance, and Jose U. Ong, Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
  • Challenged Measures
    • Republic Act No. 7496 (Simplified Net Income Taxation Scheme – SNIT), amending Sections 21 and 29 of the National Internal Revenue Code.
    • Section 6, Revenue Regulations No. 2-93, implementing SNIT by applying it to general professional partnerships (GPP).
  • Petitioner’s Contentions
    • In G.R. No. 109289, RA 7496 violates:
      • Art. VI, Sec. 26(1) – single subject rule.
      • Art. VI, Sec. 28(1) – uniformity and equity in taxation.
      • Art. III, Sec. 1 – due process and equal protection.
    • In G.R. No. 109446, Revenue Regulations No. 2-93, Sec. 6, exceeds administrative rule-making authority by extending SNIT to GPPs.
  • Legislative and Regulatory Provisions
    • SNIT’s title: “An Act Adopting the Simplified Net Income Taxation Scheme for the Self-Employed and Professionals … Amending Sections 21 and 29 of the National Internal Revenue Code.”
    • Section 21(f): imposes graduated net income tax with limited deductions.
    • Section 29: restricts allowable deductions for SNIT taxpayers to specified direct costs or 40% of gross receipts.
    • Section 23 (unaltered): GPP income is tax-exempt; partners are taxed individually on distributive shares.

Issues:

  • Constitutional Validity of RA 7496
    • Does RA 7496 violate the single-subject rule (Art. VI, Sec. 26(1))?
    • Does RA 7496 breach the uniformity and equity requirement (Art. VI, Sec. 28(1))?
    • Does RA 7496 infringe due process and equal protection (Art. III, Sec. 1)?
  • Validity of Section 6, Revenue Regulations No. 2-93
    • Did the Secretary of Finance and Commissioner of Internal Revenue exceed their rule-making authority by applying SNIT to general professional partnerships?
    • Is the administrative interpretation contrary to legislative intent and existing Tax Code provisions?

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.