CTA Case No. 1651 (Decision)

AN

SUWEICOF THE PHILIPPINE COURT OF TAX APPEII SUEZON CIT

MANUPACTURING CORPCHATION PROGTER & GAMBLE FHILIPIINE yergus Petitioner, O y 10 CTA CASE NO.15 THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTONS, Respondent.

3X

DECISION

From the decisicn of the Commissioner of Customs deted April 22, 1965, affirming thet of

the Aeting Colleetor of Custcas of the Port of

Manila dismissing Manila Frotest Case No. 37 Customs Case Ne.746) petitioner has appealed

The parties submitted the caae Tor decinion

on the follewing ustipulstion of Yacts

ofrice at the Bureau of Customs, Ayala jvenue, Yakati, Rizal, respond- ent is the duly qualified and acting duiy organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the Philippines with principml office therein located at Saraiento tuilaing, Commissioner of Cnstoms and holds Port Arem, Manila. 1.Petitioner is a corporation

exported from Maniia to Long Beach Coifornie, U., on bourd the copra cake covered by nill of Lading S/SKorenu Bear No.T-2,4ated June 1, 1964,and declared in Rntry No. 29, Series of 1964 2. Cn June 1 196+, petitione 1,500agf

2 4

CTA CASE NO.1651 DECISION -

2

were moored alongside petitioner ighters into the a/e "Korean Bear into priwately-owned lighters, which adjoins its Pactory and varehoune, and brought and unionded from aaid while it was near the breakwater in or facilities were used or availed of in losaing the copra cake from netitionerts warehouse to S/s "Kor- the Manila Bay. No Government wharves privute vharf situated at Fstero Vitaa, Tondo, Nanila, which wharf ean Bearr. 3 The eopra cake was loaded

lected on the ssid Shipment the amount of 137.00 as Mharfage feos, which dated May 26, 1964. the Dureau of Customs levicd and col wsa paid by petitioner as evidenced by 0fficial Heceipt No. 228009, dated May 28, 1964,and vouchero.+606 +.The Appraisers Division of

filed a written protest, docketed as much as no Goverment vharves or fa- cilities were used in loading the copra ceke/airectly from the lighters Whsrfage fees Manila Froteat No.837,ith the Collector of Customs of Manila against the essessment and coliection of wharfage fees on satd shipment, based vas not subject to the payment of on petitioner's ergument that, inas- to tne exporting veasel, the ghipment 5.On June 17,196petitioner

ing its proteat dated November 12, petitioner to respondent in accerd- ance with isw. tioner received the decision of the Coliector of Customa of Manila deny- 1964, which decision wa 6On Deeember 19.1964pet1- appealed by

Coilector of Custca of Manila. hibit A, pn.15-16, CTA records.) recetved the decisicn dated April 22 1965 or respondent 1n Customa Case Noo. 76 afrirming the decision of the It CnMay 17, 1965, petitioner (ex-

2 4 8

CEA CAE NO.1651 DECISION

3

The only issue raiued is whether or pot

petitioner is liable for the payment of P137.00

as wharfage feos in aonneetion with the lceding of copra cake on board a vessel for export vith- out the use of government wherves or facilities.

Petitioner contendn that, inasmuch as no

government wharf or facility was used in loading the copra cake on the s/s Korean Bear no

wharfage fees can be legelly collected. In

aupport of his contention, the cases of the

Philippine Sugar Central Agency Y. Collector of

Customm, 51 Phil., 151 and the Commissioner

of Customs V. Superior Gas and Rquipment Co. ct al.0.n.Mo.L-14115,May 25,1960have been aited.

Respondent hold, the contrary viow. He eon-

tends that whnrfage dues are imposeblo regaraless

cf the ownership of the wharf and/or facilities

used yn loading the exported merehandise.

VThe legality of the imposition of wharfage dues on goods imported into or exported frou the Philippine except those specifieally mentioned in the law, without the use of government wharves or faailities is now a settled matten(See Vig torias Milling Coy Inc. V. Auditor General, O.R.

No L-1741,November 30, 1962, and Procter

Gamble Phil.Mfg.Corp. V.Com. of Customm, G.R.

* 2 4

CTACASE NO.1651 DECISION C

No.L-22819.4pr11 27, 1967.

It appeering that the exported copra cake in

question is nct exempt from wharfage dues under

Sectton 2801 of the 2eriff and Customs Code, it

follows that the ccllection of said dves from

petitioner is legal.

WERMrone, finding no crror in the deciaion

appealed from, the same is hereby affirmed with

costs against petitioner.

SO ORDEAVD.

Queson.City, July 20, 1967.

RmUoL Presiding nowmw.matr Judge

WE CONCU

TAHISLAO H.ALVA Assoclate Judzc/ eD A

RAMON L AVANGRNA Associate Judge aAb

250