continuance of their service. Section 13 of RA 590 stated that no salary received by any public officer of the republic shall be exempted from paying its taxes. This specific part of RA 590 is in contrary with what is Article VIII Sec 9 has provided.
4. Endencia, M.P. and F. Jugo vs. D. Saturnino, as collector of Internal Revenue G.R. No. L-6355-56 August 31, 1953 En Banc Facts: After the ruling of Court of First Instance of Manila declaring R.A. 590 unconstitutional and thereby ordering the respondent David Saturnino to re-fund Justices M. Endencia and F. Hugo of the income taxes decreased from their salaries, the petitioners in joint appeal questioned the constitutionality of Republic Act 590. The lower court, citing the case Perfecto vs. Meer, exhaustively declared that the collection of income taxes is a violation of the Philippines Constitution. The Solicitor General on the side of the defendant stated that the legislative body were not in favor of the Court’s decision over Perfecto vs. Meer and immediately enacted R.A. 380 thereby imposing taxes to the Judicial Officers. The Court in the case questioned the legal basis of the Act. Issue: Whether or not sec. 13 of R.A. 590 can justify and legalize the collection of income taxes on the salary of Judicial officers. Ruling: The Supreme Court in its decision, citing sec. 9 Art. 8 of the Constitution, declared R.A. 590 unconstitutional. It construed that the law is clear in its provision that compensation of Judicial officers shall not be diminished in their continuance of their office and the imposition of the taxes on their salaries is a clear diminution of the salary. It held that when a statute transgresses the authority vested in the legislature, it is the duty of the court to declare it unconstitutional. It further explained that the action of the legislative body as stated by the Solicitor General is a violation of Separation of Power among branches of the government. The enactment of the statute because the legislative congress is not in favor of Supreme Court’s decision shows that the former also interpreted the Act. It was ruled by the court that it is only the Supreme Court that has the power to interpret the Law and Congress shall not interfere as the latter’s function is to enact the law. 5. G.R. No. L-6355-56 August 31, 1953 FACTS Collector of Internal Revenue Saturnino David ordered the taxing of Justice Pastor Endencia’s and Justice Fernando Jugo’s compensation pursuant to Sec 13 of RA 590 which states that “SEC. 13. No salary wherever received by any public officer of the Republic of the Philippines shall be considered as exempt from the income tax, payment of which is hereby declared not to be a diminution of his compensation fixed by the Constitution or by law.” According to Solicitor General Juan R. Liwanag and Solicitor Jose P. Alejandro on behalf of appellant Collector of Internal Revenue, “our decision in the case of Perfecto vs. Meer, supra, was not received favorably by Congress, because immediately after its promulgation, Congress enacted Republic Act No.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 66 pages?
- Fall '15
- Constitution of the Philippines, melinda f. pimentel