Title
Floro Cement Corp. vs. Gorospe
Case
G.R. No. L-46787
Decision Date
Aug 12, 1991
Floro Cement Corp. challenged Lugait's local taxes, claiming exemption under P.D. No. 463 and CQTE. SC ruled cement is a manufactured product, not exempt, affirming Lugait's taxing authority.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-46787)

Legal Framework

The applicable laws in this case are Presidential Decree No. 231 (P.D. No. 231), which established the limitations on local government taxing powers, and Presidential Decree No. 463 (P.D. No. 463), which specifically governs taxation related to mining operations.

Factual Background

The Municipality of Lugait filed a verified complaint against Floro Cement Corporation seeking collection of P161,875.00 as manufacturer’s and exporter’s taxes for the period from January 1, 1974, to September 30, 1975. This claim was based on Municipal Ordinances Nos. 5 and 10, which were enacted under P.D. No. 231 and P.D. No. 426, respectively. The petitioner countered that it was not liable for these taxes based on the provisions of P.D. No. 463, which limits the taxing authority of local governments over mining operations and mineral products.

Legal Arguments Presented

The petitioner maintained that the imposition of taxes by the municipality was improper under the limitations set forth in Section 52 of P.D. No. 463, which prohibits local entities from levying taxes on activities related to mining, mineral products, or any connected operations. The petitioner argued that cement, being a mineral product, was exempt from local taxation, citing case law to bolster its position.

Conversely, the respondents argued that the taxes were not sought on mining operations but on the manufacturing and exporting of cement, which they contended are separate from the statutory protections provided to mining operations under P.D. No. 463. They highlighted that the business activities of the petitioner did not fall under the exemption criteria as they pertained specifically to its manufacturing processes.

Findings of the Court

The court assessed the merits of the case, interpreting the laws in light of the established case law. It concluded that while Floro Cement Corporation may be involved in the extraction of raw materials, the final product—cement—does not qualify as a mineral product under the definitions provided within the relevant statutes. The court determined that cement is a manufactured product resulting from a distinct chemical process and not merely an extractive process.

Ruling on Tax Exemption Claims

The court held that the tax exemptions claimed by the petitioner must be strictly construed against the taxpayer. It emphasized that legislation is clear in its wording;

...continue reading

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