CASE DIGEST BY: NICEFEL D. VILLOMO
MCIAA vs. MARCOS (G.R NO. 120082; September 11,1996)
FACTS:
The MCIAA shall, in accordance with its charter, be exempt from real estate taxes imposed by the National Government or any of its political subdivisions, agencies and instruments. In 1994, the Cebu City Local Government Unit (LGU) requested payment of real estate taxes on several parcels of land belonging to the MCIAA.
MCIAA objected to the same as being unfounded and unjustified, claiming that it had been exempted under its charter. It also cites the LGC stating that the power of taxation of LGUs does not extend to taxes, fees or charges of any kind to the national government, its agencies and instruments and local government units.
However, Cebu City referred to Sections 193 and 234 of the LGC, which withdraw tax exemptions for GOCCs and real estate tax exemptions previously granted to or currently enjoyed by all individuals, whether natural or legal, including GOCCs.
MCIAA paid tax on protest. It insisted that the taxing powers of the LGUs do not extend to the levying of taxes or fees of any kind on the instrumentality of the national government. It also insisted that while it is indeed a GOCC, it nevertheless stands on the same footing as the agency or instrumentality of the national government because of the very nature of its powers and functions.
ISSUES:
[1] Is MCIAA a taxable person?
[2] Is MCIAA exempt from realty taxation?
HELD:
[1] Yes, although it previously enjoyed exemption from realty tax under its charter (which has already been withdrawn by the LGC), this exemption extended only to said tax, not to other taxes. Hence, MCIAA is still a taxable person.
[2] No, MCIAA is not exempt from realty tax by the City of Cebu. First, its tax exemption under its charter has already been withdrawn. Second, while it is true that LGUs cannot levy tax on property of the Republic of the Philippines or the National Government (outside Metro Manila), the beneficial use of property should not be given to a taxable person.
Here, MCIAA is already the owner of the parcels of land in question. Hence, even the exemption under the LGC cannot apply.
MCIAA vs. MARCOS (G.R NO. 120082; September 11,1996)
FACTS:
The MCIAA shall, in accordance with its charter, be exempt from real estate taxes imposed by the National Government or any of its political subdivisions, agencies and instruments. In 1994, the Cebu City Local Government Unit (LGU) requested payment of real estate taxes on several parcels of land belonging to the MCIAA.
MCIAA objected to the same as being unfounded and unjustified, claiming that it had been exempted under its charter. It also cites the LGC stating that the power of taxation of LGUs does not extend to taxes, fees or charges of any kind to the national government, its agencies and instruments and local government units.
However, Cebu City referred to Sections 193 and 234 of the LGC, which withdraw tax exemptions for GOCCs and real estate tax exemptions previously granted to or currently enjoyed by all individuals, whether natural or legal, including GOCCs.
MCIAA paid tax on protest. It insisted that the taxing powers of the LGUs do not extend to the levying of taxes or fees of any kind on the instrumentality of the national government. It also insisted that while it is indeed a GOCC, it nevertheless stands on the same footing as the agency or instrumentality of the national government because of the very nature of its powers and functions.
ISSUES:
[1] Is MCIAA a taxable person?
[2] Is MCIAA exempt from realty taxation?
HELD:
[1] Yes, although it previously enjoyed exemption from realty tax under its charter (which has already been withdrawn by the LGC), this exemption extended only to said tax, not to other taxes. Hence, MCIAA is still a taxable person.
[2] No, MCIAA is not exempt from realty tax by the City of Cebu. First, its tax exemption under its charter has already been withdrawn. Second, while it is true that LGUs cannot levy tax on property of the Republic of the Philippines or the National Government (outside Metro Manila), the beneficial use of property should not be given to a taxable person.
Here, MCIAA is already the owner of the parcels of land in question. Hence, even the exemption under the LGC cannot apply.
No comments:
Post a Comment