ISAAC CAMRRO vs. « CASB HO. 1153 THE COMESSTONER or nl sp? Respondents “Meow ewe eee Se & | DECISTONR This is an appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Customs affirming the decision of the Acting Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila requiring petitioner and his surety to pay, jointly and severally, in cash the am of P2,723«33e Petitioner is the claimant of a package of feather dusters and six packages of rattan split which arrived on BOARD 8/5 Talleyrand on June 28, 195% from Hongkong Customs recs, pp. 109-110. Peti- tioner having failed to present a release cortifi« cate iesued by the Central Bank of the Philippines or any of its quthorized agent banks for said goods, seizuro and forfeiture proceedings were commenced against the goods for violation of Central Bank Cir culars Nos, ‘+ and 45 in relation te Section 1363 of the fevised idministrative Code, Section 1 of Cireular No, ++ providcess Upon application by potitioner, the goods in question were released uniter Bond Nos 276% of the Century ee - ee ~ a i

SerUBLic oF HE . HILL ri GOURT OF TAX APPEAL?

MANILA

ISAAC CAMRRO, Petitioner,

Ce Te Ae

= versus « CASB HO. 1153 THE COMESSTONER or nl sp?

Respondents

“Meow ewe eee Se & |

DECISTONR

This is an appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Customs affirming the decision of the Acting Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila requiring petitioner and his surety to pay, jointly and severally, in cash the am of P2,723«33e Petitioner is the claimant of a package of feather dusters and six packages of rattan split which arrived on board 8/5 Talleyrand on June 28, 195% from Hongkong (Customs recs, pp. 109-110. Peti- tioner having failed to present a release cortifi« cate iesued by the Central Bank of the Philippines or any of its quthorized agent banks for said goods, seizuro and forfeiture proceedings were commenced against the goods for violation of Central Bank Cir culars Nos, ‘+ and 45 in relation te Section 1363(f) of the fevised idministrative Code (Customs reta, prs 91-108), Section 1 of Cireular No, ++ providcess Upon application by potitioner, the goods in question were released uniter Bond Nos 276% of the Century ee - ee ~ a i

DECTSION «

C.T.A. CASE NO. 1183 - 2.

Insurance Ce., Inc., pending termination of the seizure and forfeiture proceedings (Customs rec., p. 88). After due hearing, the Acting Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila ordered the payment, jointly and severally by petitioner and his surety of the amount of the surety bond. Petitioner appealed to the Cawmissioner of Cusg- toms, who affirmed the decision of the Collector of Customs (Customs rec., pp. 113-116). ‘ence, this anpeal.

Before submitting the case for decision, petitioner filed a motion to set aside the decision of the Come missioner ef Customs and to diamiss the forfeiture pre- ceedings on the ground thst the reveal of Central Bank Circular Nes. 44 and 48 by Central Bank Circular Ne. 133 abated 0)1 liabilities incurred under the former circulers. Said motion was denied in open court.

Petitioner questions the legality and validity ef Central Bank Circulars Nes. 44 and 48 on the ground that the same have been issued without the approval of the President of the Philippines. This contention is witheut merit. The legality and validity ef Cir- culers Mes. 44 and 45 have been sustained by the Supreme Ceurt in Francisco Pascual v. Commissioner of Customs, G. R. Mo. L-10979, June 1, 19593 Come missioner of Customs vy. Pascual, G. R. Me. Le9h36, November 18, 1959; Commissioner of Customs v. Leue terie, G R. Now L-9142, October 17, 1959.

Petitioner contends thet Circular No. 133, which removed the contre] over foreign exchange, reo pealed Circular No. 44, and that whatever lisbility or » 2973 y

DECISION «

C.TeAe CASH MO. 1153 = 3 « penalty wes incurred under Circular No. 44 was abated by the repeal. Petitioner's contention springs from an erronecus sssumption that Circular No. 133 dis- pensed with the release certificate which was re- quired under Circular No. 44. Paragraph 6 of Cireu- ler Ne. 133 provides:

“%. SEeports shall be released from the pert of entry only wpon presentation of a release certificate issued by the Centre! Bank based on letters -of credit There is no inconsistency between the provisions of Seetion 14 of Circular No. 44 and Circular Ne. 133. In view of the provisions ef paragraph 8 of Circular No. 133, which we quote he lows *8. All existing circular, rules, regulations, and eonditions governing transactions in foreign exchange not ine consistent with the provision of this Circular, are deemed incorporated hereto and made integral parts hereof by refer- ence. * Section 14 of Circular No. 44, far from being repealed, is deemed {nccrnorsted and made an integral pert of Circular Yo. 133. Even assuming arquende that, by reason of inconsistency, Circular No. 44 has been revealed by Circular Ne. 133, the validity of the forfeiture under the former circular is not affected by such revesl, for the merchandise in question were imported illeqally while the fomaer circular was still in force. The expirotion of Central Sank Cireular Mo, 44 did not have the effect of legalizing en import- ation of qoods which was illegel at the time of ime | portation (Lazaro ve Commissioner of Customs, C.T.A.

mae | ap be}

DECISION «

C.T.A. CASE NO. 1153 a 4 a Nos. 833 and 834, June 14, 1963; F. Sare Enterprises vs. Commissioner ef Customs, C.T.A. No. 752, July 3, 1963).

IN VIEW OF TME FOREGOING, the decision anpealed from is hereby affirmed. With costs against peti- tioner.

$0 OPNERED, Manila, July 3, 1963.

e ROMAN M. WALT

Associate Judge

I CONCURE

sociate Judge 275