Title
National Power Corp. vs. Municipal Government of Navotas
Case
G.R. No. 192300
Decision Date
Nov 24, 2014
NPC, exempt under LGC Sec. 234(c), contested Navotas' real property tax claims; SC ruled in NPC's favor, remanding validity of tax collection actions to RTC.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 192300)

Key Dates

  • November 16, 1988 & June 29, 1992: NPC enters BOT agreements for power stations.
  • March 24, 2003 & August 1, 2005: Transfer of plant and equipment titles to NPC.
  • 1st Quarter 2003: NPC pays real property taxes; subsequently ceases payments, invoking exemption under Section 234(c), LGC.
  • December 16, 2005: NPC files RTC petition for declaratory relief, annulment of tax notices, and preliminary injunction.
  • May 23, 2007: RTC denies relief for failure to exhaust LBAA/CBAA remedies.
  • July 18, 2008: CTA Second Division dismisses NPC’s petition on same grounds.
  • March 1 & May 6, 2010: CTA En Banc affirms dismissal and denies reconsideration.
  • November 24, 2014: Supreme Court grants review.

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution, Article X (Local Government), Section 5 (Fiscal Autonomy).
  • Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991), Sections 226, 229 (assessment appeals), Section 234(c) (exemption), Section 252 (payment under protest).
  • R.A. No. 9282 (1996), Section 7(a)(3) & (5) – CTA jurisdiction over local tax cases.
  • Revised Rules of Court, Rule 45 (Certiorari).

Statement of Facts

Under BOT agreements, private corporations built and operated gas-turbine plants, subject to NPC’s supervision. Upon title transfer of the plant machineries to NPC in 2003 and 2005, NPC paid real property taxes for one quarter, then ceased payment, claiming statutory exemption for government-owned entities engaged in power generation. The Municipal Treasurer issued multiple Notices of Delinquency, Warrant of Levy, and scheduled auction of the properties, which NPC challenged as void.

Procedural History

  1. RTC of Malabon: Petition for declaratory relief and injunction denied for non-exhaustion of administrative remedies (appeal to Local and Central Boards of Assessment Appeals) and non-payment of protested tax.
  2. CTA Second Division: Dismissed NPC’s appeal, upholding RTC’s jurisdictional finding.
  3. CTA En Banc: Affirmed dismissal, held that appeals to LBAA/CBAA are mandatory before judicial action.
  4. Supreme Court: NPC’s Rule 45 petition granted.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court of Tax Appeals has jurisdiction over an RTC decision in a local real property tax declaratory relief case.
  2. Whether NPC was required to exhaust administrative remedies (LBAA/CBAA) and to pay the tax under protest before judicial relief.

Analysis

  1. CTA Jurisdiction. Section 7(a)(3) of R.A. 9282 vests the CTA with exclusive appellate jurisdiction over “decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases.” The term “local taxes” in the statute must be read broadly to include real property taxes, in line with the LGC’s comprehensive treatment of local fiscal powers under the 1987 Constitution.
  2. Exception to Exhaustion Rule. Judicial relief may be sought directly when the challenge questions the assessor’s and treasurer’s authority to impose or collect tax—i.e., attacks the validity of the assessment, not its correctness or reasonableness. Under Ty v. Trampe, when only questions of law are at issue, appeals to administrative boards and payment under protest are unnecessary. Here, NPC challenged its exemption under Section 234(c) of the LGC

    ...continue reading

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