CTA Case No. 2991

DECISION -

CTA CASE NO. 2991 can) he (Ib) On April 19, L977, petitioner the respondent the amount of ; as caterer’s tax for the sale food during the fir quarter af 1977 shawn toy GR. Mo. O7 720200, Exh. "I", (co) On July 20, 1977 «, petitioner to the resp the amounh of of food during the second quarter of L977, a oahown by O-F, No. Ll4e1445, Exh. "od".

yoer BO, IS7y, pebkiti Capper rondant the amount of of food eine the tLhard quarter of : shown bey OLR. No. 14060R44, Exh, "RK", rf On January 19, A979, petitioner bh or ndent the amount af TOOT y : cea t, ars tan for the sale nf food during the fourth quarter of 1977 ag oahoawn by O.R. No, 19897102, Exh. "L", (3 Mn April Bo, L976, petitioner ho Te yt Ucthe: 6 oammunt of : PA 5 fa berer tax far the sale food durang bhhe quarter of 1978 shawn by O.R. No. ; exh. UR".

Any Denember 1, Leve, petitioner filed with the Commi anere of Internal Revenue a claim for refund (eh. A} praying that it be refunded the amount of FPS,465,576. 50 on the principal graund that Sec. 191i-A of the National Internal Revenue Code pursuant tea which the caterer’s tax was ard collected never hecame a law and was nonee wis ton.

DECISIOI\I CTA CASE NO . 2991 3 Respondent Commissioner of failed to act on petitioner's claim for refund. So the prescriptive period which was about to lapse, petitioner pE~ti tion on Janu~ry 20, 1979 .

On January 22, 1979, petitioner, thru counse l, letter of Acting Comm.issionc;?r of Internal Revenue Bernardo D.

C;:, r·p i o cl a t.ec:l .J ant.1a1r-y denying petitioner' s ~lai m for refund.

( E:-: h. B) • ThE~ pl'"· :i.nc.ip,':l.l i ·;~·SI...le :i. n to pay the caterer's tax dur··.inq th !;~ period from January 20, .1.977 to April Petitioner c ontends that the ass essment and c::o 1 \ c;Jc: tiun of the caterer·~ tax from January 20, 197"7 to Apr·· .:i. l 1978 was arbitrary bc>c:ausf.0 Sf:~c: t. .i. on .l 9 .1. ····A complete l y, totally and unconditionally vetoed by then Pres ident Ferdinand E. Marcos and, therefore, bec:arne a l aw.

In shor-·t, .:i. t.

Wc:\S non- On t h e hand, Inte1'"· n e-~ l F~ f-)Vc~ nu e the view that the Presi.dent vetoed only portion of Section

DECISION ~

CTA CASE NO. 2991 4S oof beat.

Bill No. LYEtS which seeks to impose a oh ane 20% fax oon gross receipt of proprieta qperakors oof restaurants ment pe rilors, har cafe anc oobher @ating places which are maintained wikthain the prem.

cr COM DOO a cf hotels, motels and resthouse Durand the nes lan af the Sixth Cangress of the Fhilipmoine: Hens EAadl No, 7629 was filed.

{ he Among other id bill prapose be insert ct Lhaian t9dea kion of the National “al Piew ERG Inbernal @owentwe Code, sy 4G of Hon Bill feo.

’ ctoan hereby = ane hunediec and hundred minetyyhwo, fo lo kere av Sec lian one hundred arie mia tde Lian Sarre aria (4 LOLeA., we s&s bax 1s ay impased fol lenses ta ler _ 3 On hors OF res uran ks , hmant parle ane ather ing pla 4 ane lauding tlubs, and caterer bier per cant of their gross receipts.

=) On praprietors or operators Of reghaurants, Das , cafes and oother eating places, ine duding clubs, where distilled capiritea y formented Liquors . or wines are served, three per cant

DECISION -

CTA CASE NO. 2991 af the from and sever of food or r OF of spadrit., Two or 2 Or wan coammercn Lal invoice apially niumbe: rec Ln be separately ued, one for sale ; aryencd . and le of md. ae sparc refreshment appro mere for € Gaechilled spiritie. fearmentoed Lieic cue WLTVE bre ephorade oof theo anvoic or rece dp to be vesuwec to the purchaser oor costomer, places Main Lever in the prem roompenuid oof a hotel, Lhmuge, comkoit, c track, Ja@iv-alai, cabaret, night ar cday Club by means of Aa cannecting roc OF as oy Ulead gee qe twenhy per cent Bip Whips tbe ablishinents are a fmaiotaineac by clubs cane oor peateg (arr ive of the disposition rome incame and whethe nok tivey eMciusively members oof thea st apers «af ities ahall pay the corresponding tax at the rate fixed above."

a oe any pent hhyes a After going through the usual legislative Mili, House Bill Ne. L7e was, however, superseded Qlidaked Tax Bill hearing the ame mumber., This Coan OQlidated Tax Bill retained the aforequoted

DECISION ~

CTA CASE NO. 2991 foo okhe Fre ident for final approval, Orn Puguat 4, 19h9, the FPresident oof the Prd lippdoes senk the following velo ome cof Fes “RAL AC AKANE "Germ tiles of ktie Here cof Pe press have lie hore de anaifiorem

YORE AOE

PROV TS DONMS CF MAT TONAL. TNE MAT. PEEVE MUTE MODE y OSs AMEMDETE coher te the PrOVvisLlons ‘ Pat dg Aarkicle VI, Conabitubhian, however, propre refr dace Fram oh and other fe end oof oor of food or re freshmen

DECISION ~

CTA CASE NO, 299) ~ Lee ss a bar aha and oeth wild ity prem hohe dt « maintained compound cof oa moked. i ckpadh, race miqhh ocr od sihiae te patrans Nears of "Tae ocrtesry cy will fore shafted boo Lhe coamsiumine public.

choyve lopment raga ote Ou a ; te shih deg heat a hag pio fram food “Thais bill, He Meo.

Fraps dae fick Ae. Gaba, become speach fully.

(SGD. ) FERDINAND &. MARCOS thraugh the then Fresidential ant odTranee T. Aguirre, Jr. even went farther by clarifying and confirming his veto of ehionm 42 of the Consalidated Tax Bild. In A Tebther chahed Juby Be, Tere (Exh.

S dential ay ry4 2.0

DECISION -

CTA CASE NO. 2991 ct wa tl aff fTrinega oT. Aguirre, dr., am his letter to ante oo MH. Sisson, Jmr., dated July @e, 1972 “he, Antara M. Gisen, re. San Marhkin Building, 1564 Manila, Fhil SLMS ated aes i teak ra on farm ye AP RPE ba \ } | AR of Heuse Baill Ne. vt o FAA. G&L qgne oof the Sec lay hha Fe ident oan hag veto me Audsh 4, 1969, veboing certain hh 11.

hones Go ooreventi¢ea io:

Wary handy yonre’sk g SOD) TRINEO T. AGLITRRE, TF, ie idential ath Me + ietantk Manida, July 20, 1e’?.."

Coorycy res corpaad ore cards shaw that Coangree bo whey the: verker oes gant and fran which the Coaneolidathed Tar EAll originated, has mot taken any apy Po nye ident.

ver ice ihe prress Al veto of the 4 See tion IGL-A of the Nakhional Internal Reverie Code, Therefore, Section 191-A remained a Howse Bill. Tt has never became a law.

e This is nok without a precedent, In the Manila Golf & Country Club, Inc. vs.

Commissioner of Internal Revenue, CTA No.

DECISION ~

CTA CASE NO. 299) pee mOLO 4 March 2O, Ler?7, thi Hangrable Court hele fol Lewes s Obie Frcecicent in “ab CALPE CUE oF the of Hearse ES Ne.

L?ile-G, was one of : ALI E , hhc confirmed that 7, NOW Fo pega Ausges b APGO,. vetoiny af the said bill (CE yo shawn thak the aver diddean by bhe mecisdiredct ehod balla dy Article thu.

pray iched of thiak york ari overrmrcine: dhye FF Ve. Rees poricdern t mel tbat Lhe Free of the EVES ce Laddclessy tay ties " yetorwrct faidide. ; ide the pres: 2 mM LEILA, bie prov is in ar aLy dado mat hecome a law. on LS i-& phoma met nad Tokernal STE!

Cac me Herb og ar geamer bk oof re an favor of pe of millions of aich TDhyere worule refund, for nowhe you find oa prov except an thi tines bh dene sshouele neat of ao re Tavs bo Thue fo ireanec i affard mo fiustif Ming notice mt ohhak "es ane owed : the Lo a oth government , deluge of claims for the Tax Code can haxing eating places don," While it is of that the Government Lo a prapoagsed provisian whieh did not become a collection of Canes.

a6 of the Governmant Lon for sustaining the LAX under oa the Sabian

DECISION -

CTA CASE NO. 2991 me 10 — strained construction of a law, much less under a provision of a revenue bill which has been vetoed by the Fresident.

"Having reached the conelusion that:

As Section 42 of House Bili No. 18739, now Republic Act No. 6110, inserting Section 191-A between Sections 191 and 192 of the National Internal Revenue Code, was vetoed by the Fresident in his veto message dated August 4, 19693 ae Congress did not override the presidential veto; and law and should not therefore form part of the National Internal Revenue Code:"

WHEREFORE. respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue is hereby ordered to refund to petitioner Manila Hotel Corporation the caterer’s tax paid in the total amount of F2,463,576.20 without interest.

No pronouncement as to costs.

, SO ORDERED.

Quezon City, Metro Manila, February 10, 1988.

» ROAQUIN

ssociate Judge DO a) ore

DECISION ~

CTA CASE NO. 2991

WE CONCUR:

AMANTE FALLER

Fresicingd dJucge AZX Z. REYES Associate Juddae

CER TIFICATION

[hereby certify that this decision was reached after due consultation among the members of the Court of Tax Appeals in accordance with Section LS, Article VITT of the Constitution.

Fragiding ducdde Court af Tax Appeals OOS be te BY