7/30/2019 Taxation Cases Aug10

1/2

Taxation Cases

1. Victorias Milling, Co. vs. Mun. of Victorias, Negros Occidental L-21183, Sept 27, 1968Plaintiff finally impleads double taxation. Its reason is that in computing the amount of taxes to bepaid by the sugar refinery the cost of the raw sugar coming from the sugar central is notdeducted; ergo, plaintiff is taxed twice on the raw sugar.

Double taxation has been otherwise described as "direct duplicate taxation." For doubletaxation to exist, "the same property must be taxed twice, when it should be taxed but once." Doubletaxation has also been "defined as taxing the same person twice by the same jurisdiction for thesame thing." 50 As stated in Manila Motor Company, Inc. vs. Ciudad de Manila, 51 there is doubletaxation "cuando la misma propiedad se sujeta a dos impuestos por la misma entidad oGobierno, para el mismo fin y durante el mismo periodo de tiempo."

With the foregoing precepts in mind, we find no difficulty in saying that plaintiff's argument ondouble taxation does not inspire assent.

First. The two taxes cover two different objects. Section 1 of the ordinance taxes a person operating

sugar centrals or engaged in the manufacture of centrifugal sugar. While under Section 2, thosetaxed are the operators of sugar refinery mills. One occupation or business is different from theother.Second. The disputed taxes are imposed on occupation or business. Both taxes are not onsugar. The amount thereof depends on the annual output capacityof the mills concerned, regardlessof the actual sugar milled. Plaintiff's argument perhaps could make out a point if the object oftaxation here were the sugarit produces, not the business of producing it.

There is no double taxation.

2. Villanueva vs City of Iloilo, L-26521 December 28, 1968

3.Pepsi -Cola Bottling Co. of the Philippines vs. City of Butuan et al, 24 SRA 789

4. Pespi -Cola Bottling Co. of the Philippines vs. Mun. of Tanauan, Leyte 69 SCRA 460

5. City of Baguio vs. De leon 25 SCRA 938

6. Yutivo Sons Hardware vs. CTA , 1 SCRA 160

7. Republic vs. Gonzales 13 SCRA 633

8. Ungab vs. Cusi, 97 SCRA 877

9. CIR vs. PASCOR 309 SCRA 402

10 CIR et al vs. CA et al, GR No. 119322, June 4, 1996

11. CIR vs. Estate of Benigno Toda 438 SCRA 290

12. People vs.Castaeda 165 SCRA 327

13. Asiatic Petroleum vs. Llanes 49 Phil 466

14. Philippine Acetyline vs. CIR 20 SCRA 1056

15. Esso Standard Eastern vs. Acting Comm. Of Customs 18 SCRA 488

16. CIR vs. Manila Jockey Club 98 Phil 670

17. Misamic Oriental vs. Dept. of Finance 238 SCRA 63

18 Davao Gulf Lumber Corp. Vs. CIR 293 SCRA 76

19. Hilado vs. CIR 100 Phil 288

20. Lincol Life Insurance vs. CA 293 SCRA 92

7/30/2019 Taxation Cases Aug10

2/2

21. Cebu Portland Cement VS. CIR 25 SCRA 789

22. Central Azaucarrera de Don Pedro vs. CTA 20 SCRA 344

23. Republic vvs. Oasan Vda. de Fernandez 99 Phil 934

24. CIR vs. Burroughs Limited GR No. 66653 June 19 1986

25.Atlas Consolidate Mining and Development vs. CIR GR No, 133467 Nov. 17, 1999

26. Reagan vs. CIR 30 SCRA 968

27. CIR vs. PJ Kiener 65 SCRA 142

28.CIR vs. SC. Johnsson and Sons, Inc. 309 SCRA 102