CTA Case No. 2163 (Resolution)

'1~-t" lJ.BLI C OJ' THE PHILIPPINEt COURT OF TAX APPEA.LI ~EZ()N CITY GONZALO SY, doing business under the name and style of GONZALO SY TRADI NG and TOl-1AS Y. DE LEOH , doing business un- der the name and style of T. Y. DE LEO:N E~_,fTEH HISES, Petitioners , - versus - C. T. A. CAGE No . 2163 THE HONORABLE COIVil~ISSIOlmR OF CUSTOHS and THE HONORfJ3LE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOUS , Resp ondent:. . x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x RES 0 LUTI 0 N Petitioners seak the review of the action taken by the Collector of Customs of l'1anila \<rho ordered the seizure of imported fresh fruits under Seizure Identi- fication Nos . 11587 , 11586 , 11585, 11571 , 11570, 11569 , 11559 , 11558 and 11604, for alleged violation of Cen- tral Bank Circular No . 289 , in relation to Section 2530 (f ) � of the Tariff and Customs Code . Pending final de- termination of the case , petitioners prayed that a �v1rit of preliminary injunction be issued .restraining respond- ents or their agents from carrying out the seizure; to enjoin pa~tie s from proceeding with the projected auction sale of the fruits in question ; and to order re- spondents to release t.o � the petitioners the imported fresh fruits �by �virtue of the bonds already submitted to the respondent Collector of Customs .

RESOLUTION - CT CASE No . 2'163 2 1'he petition for review -vras filed with �this Court on August 10 , 1970. Hov1ever , due to the urgency of petitioners ' prayer for the issuance of a preliminary writ of injunction to stop the scheduled auction sale of the seiz.ed goods on August 12 , 1970 , the same was immediately set for hearing today , August 11 , 1970. The instant petition for revievl contains no al- legation that a decision has been rendered by the Com- missioner of Customs from \vhich petitioners could ap- peal to this Court. In fact , even the Collector of cus- toms has not ye.t rendered a decision which could be ap- pealed to the Commissioner of Customs whose decisions are appealable to this Court . Consequently , in the ab- sence of a decision rendered by the said Commissioner , this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under Section 7 of Republic Act No . 1125 which provides , among others , as follows: SECo 7. Jurisdiction . - The Court of Tax Appeals shall exercise exclU�ive ap- pellate jurisdiction to review by appeal, as herein provided X X X (2) Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for seizure , detention or release of property affected; fines , forfeitures or other pe- nalt.ies ~mposed in relation thereto ? or other matters arising under the Cus-coms Law or other law or part of law adminis - tered by the Bureau of Customs. (Under- scoring s upplied . )

RESOLUTIOr - CT CAS o. 2163 3 Having declared that this Court has no jurisdic- tion over the appealed case, it necessarily :follm�1s t hat it lacks jurisdiction to entertain pe titio ners' prayer for t he issua nce of a writ of' preliminary injuncti on, t he same being merely ancillary or incidental to the main case. Our up reme Court had already decided that t his Court has no authority to issue such writ independ- ent of , or apart from , its appellate jurisdiction. (See Textile Mills Ass n. of t he Phil . v. Comm. of Cus- toms , CTA Cas e No . 1999 L-eso~, 'ept o 30 , 1969; ustin & Co ., Inc . v . Pacis , CTA Case No . 1400 LReso.:J, Oct . 31 , 1963 . ) Thus , it was he l d : 11 x x x Nowhere does t he law ex- pressly vest in the Court of Tax ppeals original jurisdiction t o issue writs of pro- hibition and injunction independently of , and apart fr om, an appealed case . The writ of prohibition or injunction t hat it may issue under the provisions of section 11 , Republic ct r o. 1125, to suspend the collec- tion of t axes , is merely ancillary to and in furtherance of its appellate jurisdiction in t he cases mentioned in section 7 of the Act . The povJer to issue the wri t exists only in cases appealed to it. This is reflected in the explanatory note of the bill (House No. 175), crea ting the Court of Tax ppeals . " (Coll . of Int . Rev . v . Yuseco , G. R. ho . L- 12518 , Oct . 28 , 1961 . ) IN VID~tr OF THE FOREGOI NG, petitioners 1 prayer for t he issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction has to be , as it is her eby , DEN I ED . 0 ORDERED . uezon City , ugust 12, 1970.