Title
Farm Implement and Machinery Co. vs. Commissioner of Customs
Case
G.R. No. L-22212
Decision Date
Aug 30, 1968
Petitioner sought duty-free entry for zinc oxide under the Bell Trade Act, but goods used imported materials, disqualifying them. Customs imposed duty; forfeiture reversed due to lack of fraud, as petitioner acted in good faith.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-22212)

Relevant Facts

The shipment of 118 bags of zinc oxide arrived on December 27, 1953, from New York, consigned by P.J. Rhodes & Co. of San Francisco to the petitioner. The goods were marked "Made in U.S.A." and were claimed to qualify as "United States articles" to ensure duty-free entry. Upon inspection, customs officers noted red labels indicating that the goods were produced in a bonded facility, prompting the determination that the shipment was subject to a 20% import duty under the Philippine Tariff Act of 1909. After paying the customs duties under protest, the petitioner sought a refund and cancellation of the forfeiture order regarding the shipment of goods.

Applicable Law

The relevant legal framework is Section 311 of the Bell Trade Act of 1946, which provides for the free entry of United States articles into the Philippines under defined conditions. The law stipulates that in cases where materials are imported into the U.S. to produce items for export, the value of these materials should not exceed 20% of the finished product's value for duty-free entry.

Exemption Requirements

The term "United States article" includes products either wholly developed within the U.S. or those manufactured using materials that meet specified thresholds concerning their value. The customs law requires that exemptions from duty must be strictly construed, placing the burden of proof on the claimant to establish eligibility for duty-free entry.

Evidence and Documentation

The petitioner presented two primary documents to support their claim for duty-free treatment: a certificate of origin from the supplier and a verification of production from the manufacturer. However, these documents failed to conclusively prove that the material used was solely of U.S. origin or that the foreign materials did not exceed the 20% threshold. The Tax Court found the evidence insufficient and ruled that it did not establish the necessary requirements under the Bell Trade Act for exemption from duties.

Customs Law Application

As per Section 1363 of the Revised Administrative Code, the customs authorities determined that the shipment was subject to forfeiture due to fraudulent misdeclaration. The statutes specify conditions under which forfeiture can be enforced, requiring proof of false declarations or fraudulent practices to evade duty obligations.

Determination of Forfeiture

The Tax Court's decision indicated that while the petitioner had prepared the import entry, it did not amount to wrongful making, as the declarations merely reiterated i

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.