Republic of the Philippirib Court of Tax Appeals Quizor City Universal Land ~ Resort Develop- Ment Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

DECISION

- 2 - promLllgated on March 30, 1977, ruled that Section 191- A (Caterer's tax) of the Tax Code vetoed by the President of the Philippines;

that it did not become a law and, thus it did not form part of the Old Ta>t Code.

Relying on this decision the petitioner on March 27~ 1978, filed with the respondent a claim for the refund of the said amount of P51,408.58. In order to toll the period of the statute of limitations, it lH(ewise filed the instant petition on April 11, 1978. The sitLlation in this case comes analogous in facts and principle with the cases brought ' on appeal to the Supreme CoLlrt. And, the issLle raised has since been adjudged in the Co••ission•r of Int•rnal Revenu• v .. lfanila Hotel Corporation, •t .. al .. , G.R. No. 83250, September 26, 1989, which may now be referred to as the aLlthoritative disposition of the particular question in controversy. As thus ruled by the Supreme CoLlrt, i~ter alia, that - "The power of the State to impose the 3'Y. caterer's ta>: is not debatable. The CoLlrt of Tax Appeals erred~ however, in holding that the tax was abolished as a result of the presidential veto of ALlgLlst 4, 1969.

It failed to examine the law then, and up to now, existing on the subject which has always imposed a 3% caterer's tax on operators of restaLlrants.

Since the Manila Hotel operates restaurants in its premises it 54 2 is liable par-agr-aph Code.

to ( 1 ) - 3 - pay the Section tax 206 pr-ovided of the in Tax "WHEREFORE~ the petition for- r-eview is gr-anted.

The decision of the Cour-t of Tax Appeals in CTA Case No.

2991 is annulled and set aside, and the claim of the r-espondent Manila Hotel Cor-por-ation for- a r-efund of its payment of cater-er-'s ta>: in 1977 to 1978 is dismissed." It is ver-y clear-, ther-efor-e, upon the adjudged appeal, that the petitioner-'s action cannot be maintained, and that the judgment must be enter-ed for- the r-espondent Commissioner- of Inter-nal Revenue.

WHEREFORE, petition is hereby dismissed without pronouncement as to costs.

WE CONCUR1

~£J.)

AMANTE~ Pr-esidin Judge

• ROAQUIN

sociate Judge ~-~ Associate Judge

- 4 - CRR.TIPICATION I hereby certify that this decision was reached after due consultation among the members of the Court of Tax Appeals in accordance with Section 13~ Article VIII of the Constitution. Presiding Judge Court of Tax Appeals 544