Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1

Tan vs. Del Rosario Jr.

Case No. 29 / ConstiLaw Batch 4

Nature of the Case:


Facts:P etitioners challenge the constitutionality of RA 7496 or the Simplified Net
Income Taxation scheme (SNIT) amending certain provisions of the National Internal
revenue Code under Arts (26) and (28)

proscriptions. THIS STAGE HOWEVER, has not been demonstrated to have been
reached within any appreviable distance in this controversy before us.
Relevance to ConstiLaw: rule of taxation

Article 6. Section 28 the rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The
congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.
The SNIT contained changes in the tax schedules and different treatment in the
professionals which petitioners assail as unconstitutional for being isolative of the
equal protection clause in the constitution.
SNIT desecratates the constitutional requirement that taxation shall be uniform and
equitable in that the law would now attempt to tax single proprietorships and
professionals differently from the manner it imposes tax on corporations and
partnerships. the contention clearly forgets, however, that such a system of income
taxation has long been prevailing rule even prior to Republic Act No. 7496.

Issue: is the contention meritorious? is it violative of Section 28 Article 6 of the


Constitution.
Held: No. Petition is Dismissed.
Ratio: Uniformity of taxation, like the kindred concept of equal protection, merely
require that all subjects or objects of taxation similarly situated are to be treated alike
both privileges and liabilities. Uniformity, does not forfend classification as long as it
1) Standards that are used therefore are substantial and not arbitrary,
2)
the categorization is germane to achieve the legislative purpose
3) The law applies, all things being equal, to both present and future conditions
4) The classification applies equally well to all those belionging to the same
class.
The legislative intent is to increasingly shift the income tax system towards the
scheduled approach in taxation of individual taxpayers and maintain the present
global treatment on taxable corporations. This classification is neither arbitrary nor
inappropriate.
With the legislature primarily lies the discretion to determine the nature (kind) object
(purpose) , extent (rate), coverage (subjects and situs (place) of taxation, Supreme
court cannot freely delve into those matters which, by constitutional fiat, rightly rest on
legislative judgment. HOWEVER, where a tax measure becomes so unconscionable
and unjust as to amount to confiscation of property, courts will not hesitate to strike
down, for, despite all its plenitude, the power to tax cannot override constitutional

Santos