CTA Case No. 1513 (Decision)

1 RMTIC OF THE PHLINR

COURT OF TLX AFPEALS qUEZON CIT

CONPANY OF MANILA, INC. ATLANTIC. GULF A PACIFIC Petitioner,

-- yersus - C.7.A.CAENO.1513 COMNISSION OP CUSTONS, Respondont

DECISIGN

This is an appeal fron a decision of the Conmis- mioner of Custons dated March 10, 19, affirming thnt of the Colloctor of Custom for the Port of Man- ila, denying petitionor's oleim for fund of the ount of 72l.00 and 2900llegedly overpaid as custome duty and special import tax.

The facts ara not in eispute. Petitionsr is a corperation duly organized and exieting wnder tho lawg of the Philippinan. It 3mported 37 bundles of atoel angles whtch shipmont arrived at the Port of Maniln on November 41960on board the .0verisel The mhipment wms covered by Mill of Lading Na9 and eclnred wnder Jort try No.26525arie of 1960 Py.l & l,custons rec.) In the 1iquidation of the import entry the Colleetor of Customs for the Port of Manila assessed and collected from potitionor the sums cf P3,622.00 an #1,78.00,ns cnstoms uty.nd pecial import tax The aaid anounta were arrived at by the inclusion of the 25 margin fee inposod umder epubiic Act o. 2609 as en elennt or part of the ta-bass of

315

C, CAaS NO. 151 PRCISION C

2

the imported article in the computation of tho customm

duty and special import tax, (Par. 3, Pet. for ieview

Par.l Answer.

On July l8, 196l, petitioner filed a potest vith

the Collector of Customs for tho Port ot Mandln, which

was docketod as Nanila rotest No. 645. In anid pro

tent, it reuueated refund of the sums of P72l,00 and F29u.00, ropresenting overpnid eustoms duty and wpeciel

import tax respectivoly, allegedly ua to the errone

ous or illegel inclusion of the a% margin fee n the

tax-base of the imported articlo xh.qpp. 20

23, Customs rec.)

In decision datsd arch 15, 1963, tha Colleetor

of Cuatons aimmiasod petitioner protomt. (Po. 58

6l, Customs rec.) Tho nnid docision wan appenled to respondent xho, on Mareh l0, 1964, affirmed the same Pp66-60Ountom roc.Hencethe present appenl

Tio oniy isae involved in thin case is purely legal, i.e., hethor or not the 25 margin fee imponed

puraunnt to Bepublic Act Ko 2609 shomld form part of tho tnx-baae in the computntion of the customs duty

and spocinl iport tax on the shipent in question

The iaaue be ore uf is not'ew. This Court, in

analogous casos, rosolved ths insue agninet petttioner

eontention/-

nre thoso apponring in the cus toms ontries and expressed in American doilars plus the inporter, the ineacopeble fact is that the true yalne and prica of the importod artieles xXx Por as 7egards the petitioner-

316

C.T.A.CASE MO.1513 DECISION -

murgin feo of 25%.The 25% fo i necessarily out payment thoreof.See Caitex rhii. inc. vs.ActgComof CuntomaCTA Case Ho.l+90 May 25, i965g Atins Consoiidated Mining and Dovelopmont Corp.va.Com.of CuntomaCTA ineluded in tho value and prioo of the inmor- tations bedause na importation payable in foreign erehange could then be offoeted with- Ca,1161,mo1962.

There being no valid renson to fustiry a departure

from the above-mentioned ruling, we hold thint the margin

fee was proporly considered es forming part of the tar

base in comyuting the custos daties and spocinl import

tax in guostion.

ioss, tho decision ppeslcd fron is hereby

afriraed, with costs againot petitioner

SO ORDWRED

ueon City, September +, 1967

Prasiding RONAN MA UNALI R OrAlr Judge M

WB CONCUR

Aiee1Lad (AKwvat ANISAO R Asaoeiate Judge ALAT

RAMON LAVANGHA Assooiate Judge NA a

317