CTA Case No. 22 (Resolution)

R E G - OF THE PHILIPPINE~ CUUHf OF TAX APPEALS MANILA PEDRO A. MANACSA , Petitioner, - versus - C.T .A. CliSE NO . 22 EDH.BERTO Y. DliVID , Acting C.T.A. CASE NO . 23 Commissioner of Customs , C. T.A. CaSE NO . 24 Respondent . C. T. A. CASE NO . 25 x- - - - - - - - - - - - -x � AND&"';$ E . LAZARO , C. T. � CASE NO . 26 Petitioner, - versus - EDILBERTO Y. DAVID, Acting Commissioner of Customs, Respondent . x- - - - - - - - - - - - -x ANDRES E . LAZAEO , Petitioner, - versus - EDILBERTO Y. DAVID, Acting Commissioner of Customs , Respondent . x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x LYDIA REYES , � Petitioner, - versus - EDILBER'l'O Y. DAVID , Acting Commissioner of Customs , Re spondent � x- - - - - - - - - - - - - -x FIDEL CABAI,LEHO, P e t i t i o ne r , - versus - EDILBERTO Y. DAVID , Acting Commissioner of Customs , Resp ondent . x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x . RESOLUTION It appearing that what has been appealed to this Court in each of the above-entitled cases is an interlocutory order or judgment of the Acting Commissioner of Customs denying peti- I\ /

RESOLUTION - C. T. A. CASES 22, 2.3 , 24, 25 & 26 . - 2- tionars 1 Motion to Lift ,., arrant of s.aizure and Detention; That what section 7 _of Republ ic Act No . 1125 means by gecisions of the Commissioner of Customs which could be appealed to this Court , are judgments or orders rendered by said Commis- sioner of Customs 'I'IJhich are final in nature and not interlocu- tory orders or judgments which do not dispose of the case com- pletely but leave still something to be done upon the merits as required by Sections 1.375 to 1.382 of the Revised dministrative Code; That this view is in conformity with Section 2, Rule 41, of the Rules of Court, the underlying philosophy of which is to avoid multiplicity of appeals in a single case; That there is more reason to apply said Section 2 of Rule 41 of the Rules of Court in all the cases over which this Court was conferred by Republic ct No . 1125 exclusive appellate juris- diction to review on appeal , considering that the principal pur- pose for which this Court was creat ed is to expedite the disposal 'of tax an:l customs 1 cases. iiliBBEFORE , finding the motion to dismiss of counsel for the respondent well-founded, and without objection on the part of counsel for the petitioners, the same is hereby sustained, and all the above- entitled cases dismissed without prejudice on the part of petitioners of interposing another appeal to the Court after all the requisites of Secti ons 1375 to 1.382 of the Revised t.dministrative Code have been complied vdth. l.ith costs against petitioners . <:O ORDERED . :., ~~ Presiding Judge