Title
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 192398
Decision Date
Sep 29, 2014
PSPC sought a refund for DST paid on real property transfer during a merger; SC ruled transfer by operation of law exempts DST under NIRC Section 196.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 27701)

Antecedent Facts

Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation (PSPC) entered into a Plan of Merger with Shell Philippine Petroleum Corporation (SPPC) on April 27, 1999. Following the approval of this merger by the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 1, 1999, PSPC was required to pay documentary stamp taxes amounting to P524,316.00 and, subsequently, an additional P22,101,407.64 for the transfer of real property from SPPC to PSPC. PSPC later filed for a refund asserting that the documentary stamp tax it paid was erroneous.

Court of Tax Appeals Decision

The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) upheld PSPC's claim for tax refund, emphasizing that the transfer of SPPC’s real property to PSPC was a statutory consequence of the merger and did not constitute a sale, thus not subject to documentary stamp tax. The CTA noted that the transfer occurred automatically by operation of law without the need for a deed.

Court of Appeals Decision

In its September 10, 2009 decision, the Court of Appeals confirmed the CTA's ruling, agreeing that since the transfer of properties resulted from the merger and was not a voluntary act requiring a deed, the documentary stamp tax did not apply. The CA held that PSPC was entitled to the refund or tax credit of the amount erroneously paid.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner argued that the transaction involved both the issuance of shares and the transfer of real properties, each of which is subject to documentary stamp tax under different sections of the NIRC. The petitioner contended that Section 196 of the NIRC applies to all transfers of real property, while also asserting that the merger itself involved voluntary acts that warranted taxing the resultant transactions.

Respondent’s Position

In response, PSPC maintained that the transfer of real property was inherently part of the merger and occurred without consideration. Therefore, PSPC argued, Section 196 did not apply because that provision pertains strictly to sales, which necessitate an exchange of value, unlike the absorbent nature of a merger.

Legal Interpretation of Section 196

The Supreme Court analyzed Section 196 of the NIRC, concluding that it explicitly applies to sales of real property. The Court noted that the phrase "granted, assigned, transferred or otherwise conveyed" is qualified by the context of sale, and thus any conveyan

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.