TAX 2 030321.pdf - G.R No 188497 Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila The issue raised here was whether the manufacturer was entitled to

TAX 2 030321.pdf - G.R No 188497 Republic of the...

This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 32 pages.

Tax 2 – Session 1 (March 03 2021) Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila FIRST DIVISION G.R. No. 188497 February 19, 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, vs. PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION, Respondent. SEPARATE OPINION BERSAMIN, J.: In essence, the Resolution written for the Court by my esteemed colleague, Justice Martin S. Villarama, Jr., maintains that the exemption from payment of the excise tax under Section 135(a) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) is conferred on the international carriers; and that, accordingly, and in fulfillment of international agreement and practice to exempt aviation fuel from the excise tax and other impositions, Section 135(a) of the NIRC prohibits the passing of the excise tax to international carriers purchasing petroleum products from local manufacturers/sellers. Hence, he finds merit in the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation (Pilipinas Shell), and rules that Pilipinas Shell, as the statutory taxpayer directly liable to pay the excise tax on its petroleum products, is entitled to the refund or credit of the excise taxes it paid on the petroleum products sold to international carriers, the latter having been granted exemption from the payment of such taxes under Section 135(a) of the NIRC. I CONCUR in the result. I write this separate opinion only to explain that I hold a different view on the proper interpretation of the excise tax exemption under Section 135(a) of the NIRC. I hold that the excise tax exemption under Section 135(a) of the NIRC is conferred on the petroleum products on which the excise tax is levied in the first place in view of its nature as a tax on property, the liability for the payment of which is statutorily imposed on the domestic petroleum manufacturer. I submit the following disquisition in support of this separate opinion. The issue raised here was whether the manufacturer was entitled to claim the refund of the excise taxes paid on the petroleum products sold to international carriers exempt under Section 135(a) of the NIRC. We ruled in the negative, and held that the exemption from the excise tax under Section 135(a) of the NIRC was conferred on the international carriers to whom the petroleum products were sold. In the decision promulgated onn April 25, 2012, 1 the Court granted the petition for review on certiorari filed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR), and disposed thusly: WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED. The Decision dated March 25, 2009 and Resolution dated June 24, 2009 of the Court of Tax Appeals En Banc in CTA EB No. 415 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The claims for tax refund or credit filed by respondent Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation are DENIED for lack of basis.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture