CTA Case No. 2703 (Decision)
'�REPlJnt.TC OF TI'TE P!llLTPPll'fKS COURT 07 TA. APPF.ALS QUEZON CITY . .. . 70 1 �� �� c � I 1� 1 -
DECI S I O CT C SE NO . 27 03 - 2- sai d art icl s t o b 56, 550 kilos . a s f urni shed a nd certified to by t h e c ons i gne 1 s cus t oms b r oker . Upon ex min a ti on b y t h Burea o f Cu s toms, however, th said c a r goes were f o und t o h a v e n a ctu a l gross t-reight of 113, 100 kil o s, wh ich i s mo r e tha n 20% f the weight decl a r ed in the men d ed manif e t. On p ril 23~ 1969, th e rea u of Cus t oms wrot petitio ne r letter req uiring it to xp l a in and show c a use, with i n f ive (5) d y s f r om receip t the r eof, why no adminis tra tive fine should be i mposed upon the vessel f or vio l a tion of Section 2523 of the Tariff a nd CUs t oms Cod � In r eply t o t h e f o r ementio n e d letter, p e t i t i o ner exp l a ined t h a t when the sa i d c a r- g o e s w r e loade d a t t he p ort o f d e a rtu re, the shipper d i d n o t f urnis h or i ndica t e any reight, henc no wei g ht was d eclar ed i n t he man i fes t. o weve r, wh en t he consigne ' r q ues t d for t he r e l ease of the shipm nt~ t he c o n s i g n e e's c us t oms broke r c r t i f ied a nd gu a r a nte d tha t t he wei ght s hou l d be 56,550 kilos a n d thi s was ind ica ted in t he a end e d ma ni fes t. Not c o nte n t ed with the exp l a n a t i o n, an adminis - trat iv p roceeding (Admi nistra tiv Case o. V-4 4 3/69 ) wa s ins ti tut ed by the Bureau o f Customs gainst the ves sel and pe titioner herein for viola tion of Section 2523 o f the Tar i ff a nd Cus t oms Cod , a n d on June 22 , 1971, after the t ermina tion of ~ aid p roceeding , the
'� <' - � 'l? - ... l � - vi- 1
-� 27 � 1 � { r 2 or 1 n� i ' c i� 523
- �7 n th � i f 1 i � f ii r � 0 i � t. 0 � �� � 1 �� � 7� i t 524
-� 7 - .. - � 1 � 525
� 73 - 7- 1 c bc 0 t i c 1 1 0 i ic �� � '1 } cc u t
c � 270 - r 1c ut l� - , i 1 t 2 � 2� (! "'� c rc t. . l n - 0 af 527 i- n �r 1 i
�0 �� � - � �l " � 7 almost 1 '� - � � 528
0- e rc 1 0 � l . oo � ( n . � � 1� I i c .. ... � � .7 � I 529
More in CTA Decisions
- CTA Case No. 5395 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 5395)
- SM INVESTMENTS CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9569)
- CTA Case No. 6474 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 6474)
- CTA Case No. 6146 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 6146)
- KUEHNE + NAGEL, INC., v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10216)
- BAHAY BONDS 2 SPECIAL PURPOSE TRUST, administered by Land Bank of the Philippines through its Trust Banking Group v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9916)
- FORD GROUP PHILIPPINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10877)
- CTA Case No. 2392 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 2392)
Want an analysis of this document?
Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.