CTA Case No. 774 (Decision)

nm REPUBLIC OF PHIL:j:PP I NES CX?YU - F T "{ APPEALS M., NIIA vERRfE I :!VESTM::NT COi lP; ,;y , C. T. A. Petitioner ~ C Sc NO. 774.- - ver s 1s - COM1v1ISSIOI IZR OF CU.STO;,IS , Respondent. X--------- - --X DECI S I 0 N 3ometime in :,1a y , 1955 , the petitioner i mported f rom Hongkong one pa ckage containing 72 dozens of silk scarves , 12 dozens of fountain ocn sets , 50 dozens of of fountain pens , and 15 dozens of mechanical lighters with a total value of US $468. 85. The said importa- j tion was , however 1 declared in the airway bill of lad- ing as consisting of 4 3ets of mah j ong , 15 dozens of handkerchiefs and 12 dozen~ of scarves valued at US $l15 , 00. �s the said importation was not covered by a release certificate of the Central Bank as required by Circulars Nos . 44 and 45 of said Bank and in view of its misdeclaration in the bill of lading , the arti cles in question were seized and declared forfeited by the Collector of Customs of Manila . Upon a~?eal to the Commissioner of Custor:1s , the decree of forfeitur~ was affirmed ; hence , the inst ant appeal. Petitioner ' s a/peal is premised on the grounds that Circulars Nos . 44 and 45 of the Central Bank are invalid in so far as they sought to regulate importa- tions not involving dollar remitt ances and that the misdec}aration was due solely to a mistake committed /"" I

,...c 310 c . r . ~ . c ,...:- � 774 - 2- in good faith . s regards the claim that Circulars os . 44 and 45 are invalid and may not be availed of to justify the seizure and forfeiture of goods imnorted which did not involve dollar remittances , it is enough to state that the Supreme Court in several cases has sustained the validity of said circulars and the seizure and forfeiture of im~ortations in violation thereof in relation to Section 1363(� ) o the dministrative Code . (0ee Pascual v. Commissioner , G. R. ~o . L-12219 , oril 25 , 1962 , and cases cited therein.) In view of what has been said in regard to the validity of Circulars os . 44 and 45 of the Central Bank , ve find it unnecessary to pass upon the second ~he ground raised in the a peal. affirmed , decision appealed from is here with costs again/stpetitioner� . P.D2RED. Manila , -ugust 27 , 1962. WE CONCURs ~ residing udge