Court of Tax Appeals
0Campos Rurda Corpumatiur, et al. vs. Gsteae Case Now 2162 Cummissigner of Custom
‘EFUSLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
COURT OF TAX APPEALS
QUEZON CITY
CAMPOS RURDA CORPUMATIUR, | petitioner,
- Versus - GsTeAe CASE Now 2162
CUMMISSIGNER OF CUSTOM, Respondent. n| ie) \.
ee ee ee ©
DECiSiCcH
petitioner Campos Aveda Corporation seeks «6 review of e decision of respondent Commissioner of Gustoms affirming the denial by the Collector of Customs of wWantile of « protest filed by it ageinst the assessment and coliecticn of custeus duties and taxes in the amount of #3,411.00 on its importation of 30 crates of “aluainun slats."
feppoduced below are the andisputed findings of . facts narrated in the decision of respondent appealed from and which were also adopted by cowisel for pee ‘biticner;
The shipment Cconusisting of jU crates, deserived in shipping papers, Ccoamerciei inveices and other related documents as “esluginus slate", arrived io the Port of eeits So seeks tie, lyéy on board the 4/5 “pullippine Leonllia", Keg. fo. 733 wer Bill of Lating So. © and entered under import Latry bo. 35763, series of 19%). For tariff purposes, the iwporter, the Campos nueda ee tarough thelr custous broker ed the articies under tariff heading Hos a er at Ri’ rey which decleretion wes conf Custoas Szaniner upon examination and accepted by the Customs Appraiser con- cerned. Duties and taxes as assecsed
BEGISION « |
CTA CASK No. 2182 in the smount of 502.00 were ¢d saad tan tlaaeten der ce me tsa ¥ under Central bank Ufficial Keceipt Nee 36102.
On May 26, 1969 the importer firm h its Aesistent General Manager filed a letter-protest with tae Collec- tor of the port, secking a refund of the amount of #3,' bal.u0 representing an al- deged excess in the assessment of customs duties made on the py os. daporter firs averring that through vertence, the subject articles were declared wker teriff heading Wo. 76.03 sub-paragraph th at Bong as instead of sub- same tariff head- ins a8 at Sas aa Valorem. (fxhibit 5) as correctly stated by reaponcent comisciocner of Oustoms and accepted by petitioner, tuere is ne dispute that the applicable tariff nesading is No. 76.03 of the Tariff and Customs Code. The only issue as presented by the parties is whether the articles should be appraised ane ciassified under sub-paragraph "a" with an gd Valorem duty of 30) or sub-paragraph “e" at only 1) ad Valoren.
Tariff heading Wo. 76.03, as awended by Executive Urder tio, 66, January 25, 196%, reads as Zollewss 7603 Wrought plates, sheets anc strips, of edominums A- to Length or shape, s=bostedy ed sheets and strips (exblading tubed sheets for refrigerators, ior-enauelled Ciied sheets), _ 132
VBECISIUN «
CTA CASK HO. 2162 ad val. 30% ‘Be Others aad val. 10% And under Nietes I(c) of Chapter 76 of the Tariff and Customs Cude, it is stated thats .
1. <AS Used in this Glapter, the following words and phrases shall sean:
(c) Wrought plates, sheets, and strips (heeding lio. 76.03)8 Vlat-surfaced, wrought products (colied or not), of which tee maximus cross~ Sectional dimension exceeds six ailli- meters, and of which the thiekness ex- ceeds U.15 alilineters but does not exceed one-tenth of the width, Head- ing No. 76.03 shail apply to such products whe or not cut to shape, perforated, corrugated, ribbed, enan- neled, cur » polished or coated."
Back te the findings of facts of respondent, we again quote;
The articles under consideration in this are described in the various documents ting to the shipment as, “aluminum alats, — shat, dest Vell mp x 50.8 mm x 2000 ft. ~ description of which was confirmed by the 5 Santens dxeminer as indicated in the return on examination. The sample attached to the record (Bxuni “10") show that it is colored end the dimensions, at least the width thereof, tallies with tne findings of the Appraisers Division, Customs Labora- tory sis in its report dated May 5, mig showed that the article (sample) is, “made of alaninug, coated with nts te lacquer enamel." (Lab. Keport 70-1006) (Exh. B-2.)
If the subject articles are .22 millimeter in thickness (which exceeus 0.1) alliimeter but aoes not exceed one-tenth of ita width); 50.6 ailliaeters in width or cross-sectional dimension (which exceeds
DECISION «
CTA CABE Ne. 2102 " six sillimeters); are coiled in 2,000 feet lengths;
end are coler-enamellea, they fall within the excep- tions provided fur by the above cited sub-heading “A" of heading No. 76.03 of the Tariff and Customs Code, ena being excepted, should be classified under sub-hesad- ing “B* of the same heading ilo. 76.03 with an ga Valores « duty of 10%. | The articies uncer consideration are described however in the varicus docuwents relating to the ship- went as “alusinum slats" and declared by petitioner's customs broker (although inadvertently, as claimed) under teriff heading No. 76.0}, sub-paragraph "A" at 30 ad NYalores duty. iespondent thus tates the posi- tion that aluminum slats being essentially aluminum strips, they should be classified under tariff heade ing Wo. 76.03, sub-paragraph "a".
Thie brings us to the uncontradicted testimony ~ of the owner end peneral manager ef the Zip Manufac- turing Enterprises, Mr. Busebio Nazario, to the effect that he had for at least fifty tines iuported from the United States and Japan aluminum glats which are exact- iy the same es the articles in question, that said : articles are actually aluminum sheets but they ere commercially snows as aluminum slats; that these aa- terials are used in the production of venetian blinds, which is the business of the Zip Manufacturing Enter- prizes; that in ali of the importations that he made, GTA CASE Ro. 2182 5 he only pald 10) gd yalores for the release of the erticles from the Bureau of Customs, that sometine in August, 19606, he requested the Teriff Commission to make a teriff classification of these articles and in response thereto, the sald Comalssion issued a ruling on September 6, i966 stating that the said articles are subject to only 10p gd yajorem. (Exhibit K.)
ln this connection, petitioner submitted the opinion of the Gecretary of Justice dated Februery 5, 1906 (Bxhibit X) which states that the tariff classi- fication made by the Tariff Commission under section 1313(a) of the Tariff end Customs Code is binding upon. the Bureau of Customs. Since the theory of respondent thet aluminum slats are essentially aluninum strips ond thus should be classified under tariff neading No. 76.03 sub-peregraph "A" at 30% ad valorem duty is based only on a mere view of a customs appraiser, worthwhile. noting in the epinion of the Secretary of Justice is the reconciliation of the apparent conflict between the authority of the Tariff Commission ander section 1313(a) of the Tariff and Customs Code to indicate the heading under which an article is dutiable anc the duties of appraisers under section 1404 of the same Code to appraise and clessify articies.
We quote with approvel from the said opinion of the Secretary of Justice, - 135
DECISION «
GIA CASE Wo. 2182 6 when an article iatended to be iuported is not specifically wsentioned in the Tariff and Customs Code, the Tariff Commission js authorized by section 1313(a), when so re- quested by the interested party, to indicate the heading under which the article ia or shell be dutiable," amd the classification of the article upon laportation “shall be made according to the heeding indicated by the Tariff Commission." And this is blading upon the Bureau of Customs. ftowever, in ali other Cases including those involving articles “not specifically mentioned in said Gode,* e.g. where no Clasaification has been made by the Teriff Commission “prior to entry,” the Bureau of Customs has, pursuant to section asus, the authority to appraise and classify all articles imported in accordance with the Categories fixed by seid Code. (Hxhibit Xx, PP. 39-40, CTA records) Since “aluminum slats, premium quality, 0.22 aa x 50.6 mm a 20U0 ft. per coll* is not specifically uentioned in the Tariff end Custous Gode, the Tariff Conuis- sion is authorized by section 1jl3{a) to indicate the heading under which the article is dutiable ont the Classification of the article upon importetion shall _ be wade according to the heading indicated by the Tariff Commission, We therefore believe that the teriff Classification made by the Tariff Coumlssion to the effect that the aluminum slats imported by petitioner should be appreised. and classified under heading No. /6.03, sub-paragraph "i", with an ag Yalorey auty of 10s is binding upon the Bureau of Customs, ;
WHBKEFURB, the decision appealed from is reversed, and respondent Commissioner of Customs
VECISIUN «=
is ordered to refund to petitioner Caupos Aueda Corporation the sum of #3,%11.00, representing excess taxes and duties paid by it on the sald importation of ju crates of aluminum slats.
BU URDEKED.
Quezon Gity, July 3, 1971.
Betta k
Presiding Judge
We CUNCURs
Castes Re ny
Associate J
a Ramon Lb. AVANCENA