Kilosbayan Vs.

Morato

Legislative deliberation was considered by the majority opinion in interpreting Sec.1 RA 1169

GR. 113375

Facts: PCSO doe not have the power to enter into any contracts which would involve it in any form of collaboration, association or joint
venture

the charter of the PSCO does not absolutely prohibit it from holding or conducting lottery in collaboration, association or joint venture.

what the PSCO prohibited from doing so is to invest in a business engaged in sweepstakes races, lotteries and similar activities

for the reason of these are competing activities and the PSCO should not invest in the business of competitor.

Sec1 grants the PSCO authority to do any of the ff.

- to hold conduct charity sweepstakes races, lotteries and similar act.

- to invest whether by collaboration, association or joint venture with any person, association, company or entity in health and welfare
related investments, programs, projects and activities which may be profit oriented except the activities mentioned in the preceding
paragraph (a) because as already stated, this are competing activities.

the limitation applies when made by the PSCO alone, by it self

mr. justice davide during the deliberation had it been their intention to prohibit the PSCO from entering into collaboration, association or
joint venture with others even in the instances when the sweepstakes races lotteries or similar act. are operated by itself, they would have
made the amendment not in par. b but in par a. of sec 1 as the logical place of amendment

NOTE: THIS DISSENTING OPINION IS VERY PERSUASIVE OF THE FOLLOWING RULE THAT THE BEST INTERPRETER OF
THE LAW OR ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS IS THE AUTHOR OF THE LAW.

COURTS MAY RESORT TO THE EXPLANATORY NOTE TO CLARIFY THE AMBIGUOUS AND ASCERTAIN THE
PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE STATUTE.

Municipality of Nueva Era VS. Municipality of Marcos

Facts:

the municipality of nueva era was created and previously organized as rancherias by virtue of EO 66
The municipality of Marcos was created pursuant to RA 3753. the municipality of nueva era was not mentioned and not considered as a
source of territory of marcos.

the problem however lies on the description of the boundaries on the east, by the Ilocos Norte- Mt. Province boundary

marcos did not claim any part of nueva era as its own town.

issue:

WON the eastern boundary of the marcos extend over and cover portion of nueva era.

held:

where there is ambiguity in a statute, court mays resort to the explanatory note to clarify the ambiguity and ascertain the purpose and intent of
the statute.

only dingras is specially named by the law as source territory of marcos, the said description of the boundaries of marcos is descriptive only
of the listed brgy of diagrams as compact and contiguous territory.

considering the description of the eastern boundary of marcos under ra 3753 is ambiguous, the same must be interpreted in light of the
legislative intent.

Martin Centeno Vs. Hon. Victoria Villalonpernillos and the people of the philippines

Facts:

the officer of the sampan kantandahan ng anyone ng tikay launched a fund drive for the purpose of renovating the chapel of tikay. petitioner
together with the group approached judge adoration g. angels solicited from her a contribution of 1500. the solitation was made without a
permit from the DSWD

The judge filed a case on the grounds of violation of PD 1564 or the Solicitation permit law -sentencing them to each pay fine of 200 guilty
beyond reasonable doubt.
petitioner alleged that PD 1564 only covers solicitation made for charitable or public welfare purposes but not to those religious purpose such
as construction of chapel

issue:

won the phrase charitable purposes should be construed in its broadest sense so as to include a religious purpose.

held:

the religious purpose of the solicitation within the concept of charitable purpose which under the PD 1564 requires a prior permit from the
Dept. of social service and debt. under pail of penal liability in the absence thereof, would be prejudicial to petitioner.

the term charitable should be strictly construed so as to exclude solicitations for religious purposes. thereby we adhere to the fundamental
doctrine underlying virtually all penal legislations that such interpretation should be adopted as would favor the accused.

the word charitable is a matter of description rather than of prescription.

PENAL LAWS ARE CONSTRUED LIBERALLY IN FAVOR OF THE ACCUSED

People of the phil. vs. saipan zladjaalam

Facts:

Appellant LAdjaalam was charged and convicted by the RTC of the crime of direct assault with the multiple attempted homicide for firing on
unlicensed m-14 rifle at several policemen who were about to enter his house to serve search warrant. he likewise convicted for the crime
illegal possession of firearms and ammunition penalized by PD 1866 as amended by RA 8294.

ISSUE: won appellant can be convicted of illegal possession of firearms when he used firearms in the commission of another crime.

held:
Sec 1 ra 8294

that if an unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of the any crime, there can be no separate offense of simple illegal possession of
firearms. hence if the other crime is murder or homicde, illegal possession of fire arms becomes merely an aggravating circumstance, not a
separate offense.

since direct assault with multiple attempted homicide was committee in this case, appellant can no longer be liable for illegal possession of
fire arms.

moreover penal laws are construed liberally in favor of the accused. in this case, the plain meaning of RA 8292 simple language is more
favorable to herein appellant.

TAXES MUST NOT BE IMPOED BEYOND WHAT THE LAW EXPRESSLY AND CLEARLY DECLARES AS TAX LAWS
MUST BE CONSTRUED STRICTLY AGAINST THE STATE AND LIBERALLY IN FAVOR OF THE TAXPAYER.

Commissioner of internal revenue vs. la tondena distillers

facts:

Respondent la tondena entered into a plan of merger, as a result of merger the assets and liabilities of the absorbed corporation were
transferred to respondent and later changed its corporate to GSM.

the BIR issued a ruling stating the pursuant not NIRC, no gain or loss shall be recognized by the absorbed corporation as transfers of all
assets and liabilities
however the transfer of assets, such real properties shall be subjected to documentary stamp tax.

respondent paid the DST (Oct 31 2001 to nov. 15 2001).

2003, claiming that it is exempt from paying the DST , respondent filed an administrative claim for tax refund

the CTA rendered decision finding respondent entitle d to its claim for tax refund

issue: won property absorbed by the surviving corporation is a merger is exempt from the payment of DST.

held:

DST is imposed only on all conveyances, deed, instrument or writing where realty sold shall be conveyed to a purchaser or purchasers.

there is no error on the part of the CTA in granting respondents claim for tax refund.

the court stressed that taxes must not be imposed beyond what the law expressly and clearly declares as tax laws must be construed strictly
against the state and liberally in favor of the taxpayer.

IN CASE OF DOUBT, TAX STATUTES ARE TO BE CONSTRUED STRICTLY AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT AND
LIBERALLY IN FAVOR OF THE TAXPAYERS, FOR TAXES BEING BURDES, ARE NOT TO BE PRESUMED BEYONF
WHAT THE APPLICABLE STATUTE EXPRESSLY AND CLEARLY DECLARES

Republic of the Phil. Vs. Intermediate appellate court

Facts:

the republic of the philippines through the bureau of internal revenue, commenced an action in the court of 1st instance to collect from the
spouses deficiency income taxes for the years of 1955 to 1959

they contented that they had availed of the tax amnesty under PD 23, 213 AND 370 and had paid of 10,400. the govt. is in estoppel to
demand and compel further payment of income taxes by them.

the trial court rendered a decision holding that the defendant had settled their income tax deficiency for the years 1955 to 1959 with its
corresponding receipt.

issue:
won the spouses granted tax exemptions.

Held:

even assuming that the deficiency tax assessment against the spouses were correct, the latter have already paid almost the equivalent amount
to the government by way of amnesty, the government is estopped from collecting the deficiency tax assessment.

IN CASE OF DOUBT, TAX STATUTES ARE TO BE CONSTRUED STRICTLY AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT AND LIBERALLY
IN FAVOR OF THE TAXPAYERS, FOR TAXES BEING BURDES, ARE NOT TO BE PRESUMED BEYONF WHAT THE
APPLICABLE STATUTE EXPRESSLY AND CLEARLY DECLARES

petition denied.

AS A RULE, ANY CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION FROM A TAX STATUTE IS STRICTLY CONSTRUED AGAINST THE TAX
PAYER. HOWEVER, WHERE THE LAW IS CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS, THE LAW MUST BE TAKEN AS IT IS, DEVOID
OF JUDICIAL ADDITION OR SUBTRACTION

Acting commissioner of custom vs. manila electric company and CTA

Facts:

manila electric company private respondent claims that it is exempt from the special import tax not only by virtue of sec 6 of the

RA 1934, which exempt from said tax equipment and spare parts for use of industries but also exempts its insulators from all taxes of
whatever kind an nature.

issue:

WON the claim for exemption from tax statute be strictly construed against the respondent

held:

affirmatively put, the law frowns on exemption from the taxation hence an exempting provision should be construed strictissimi juris

we find the provision of section 186 A whenever a tax free product is utilized, all encompassing to comprehend tax free raw materials, even
if imported. where the law provided no qualification for the granting the privilege, the court is not at liberty to supply any.

it is well-settled doctrine- THE LAW MUST BE TAKEN AS IT IS, DEVOID OF JUDICIAL ADDITION OR SUBTRACTION
TAX EXEMPTION MUST BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED AGAINST THE TAXPAYERS AND LIBERALLY IN FAVOR OF THE
STATE

Misamis Oriental association of coco traders vs. Dept of Finance secretary, BIR

Facts:

Petitioner MIsamis coco traders is domestic corporation whose members are engaged in the buying and selling copra. the petitioner alleged
that copra was classified as agricultural food product exempt from VAT at all stages of production or distribution

under Sec 103 a. the sale of agricultural non-food products exempt from VAT only if the sale is made primary producer or owner of the land

issue:

won copra is an agricultural food or non-food product

held:

CIR gave a strict construction consistent with the rule that TAX EXEMPTION MUST BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED AGAINST THE
TAXPAYERS AND LIBERALLY IN FAVOR OF THE STATE

Dr. Kintanar his classification of copra as food was based on agricultural commodities and other components used in processing food. the
opinion of CIR in the exercise of power under sec 245 to make ruling or opinion in connection with the implementation of the provision.

in the case at bas, we find no reason for holding that respondent commissioner erred in not considering copra an agricultural food product
as the solicitor general contends copra per se is not food it is not intended for human consumption.

petition dismissed.

TAX EXEMPTION STRICTLY CONSTRUES AGAINST THE TAXPAYER

Resins incorporated vs. auditor general of the philippines