Title
Manila Gas Corp. vs. Collector of Internal Revenue
Case
G.R. No. 42780
Decision Date
Jan 17, 1936
Manila Gas Corp. sought tax refund for withheld dividends/interest paid to foreign corporations; SC ruled payments subject to Philippine income tax, citing separate juridical personality and income source.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 42780)

Factual Summary of Transactions

For 1930–1932, Manila Gas paid P1,348,847.50 in dividends and P543,244.90 in interest on bonds and other indebtedness to its foreign stockholder and creditor corporations. It withheld and remitted P56,757.37 to the Bureau of Internal Revenue under protest.

First Issue: Dividend Withholding Tax

Manila Gas challenged the withholding on dividends, arguing that taxing its stockholders effectively taxes the corporation in violation of its tax-exemption franchise and the Contract Clause.

Analysis Under Contract Clause and Precedent

The court applied the rule from Philippine Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Collector of Internal Revenue: a corporation’s legal personality is distinct from that of its shareholders, thus withholding on dividends does not impair the corporate-charter exemption. The franchise’s commutation of the corporate tax does not bar taxing dividend recipients. The first error was overruled.

Second Issue: Source of Interest Income

The corporation contended that interest paid abroad to nonresidents did not constitute Philippine-sourced income and thus fell outside the tax law’s reach.

Due Process and Taxation Jurisprudence

Under due-process principles, a state may tax income whose source or situs lies within its territory. The court noted precedent distinguishing nonresident-earned interest, but held that Act No. 3761 extended source-based taxation to interest “paid within or without the Philippine Islands.”

Application of Income Tax Law to Interest Payments

Despite uncertainty as to payment location, the majority found that Manila Gas’s business operations and earnings originated in the Philippines, and that the situs of income is its origin. Accordingly, interest paid to nonresidents was properly taxed under the amended Income Tax Law. The second error was overruled, and the trial court’s dismissal

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.