CTA Case No. 3141 (Resolution)
� REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUE~O CITY LITO JUA SHIPPI G COKPA Y, C.T.A. CASE 0. 31 1 represented by Grane port Corpor tion s sub-agent, Peti t~oner, - versus - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM , Responden � X- - - - - - - - - - - - X E S 0 L UT I 0 N A otion to Dismia the petition for revi v in this c w s f~ ed by re pondent on October 2, 980 on the ground th t this Court is allegedly ithout jurisd~ction to tak cognizance nd/or entert in petitioner' appe 1 s1nce it was filed out of time. <C.T.A Records, pp. 3 -36. > ln it Manifestation and Mot1on � led on November 7, 1980, petitioner assailed the Motion t.o Dismiss for lack o� notice o:f hearing and the efore a �mere scrap o:f paper which should b consJ..d ed non-existent. " Petit1oner prayed that r pond n be declared 1n de:fault �or not having �11 d n n wer within the prescribed period. <C.T.A. record , pp.
� RESOLUTION - C.T.A. CASE NO. 3141 - 2- 39-41). Up on manifest ation . o� pe t itioner's counsel in the hea ring o� this case on November 12, 1980, resp ond nt's Motion to D~sm~ss and petationer's Mani fest tion and Mot~on were held ~n abeyance indefin~t ly until such im when the Sup e e Cour has decid d th c e n olv1.n he same p t1. s and p. 42 A otion to Cane 1 issues cc. T � � r cor Hearing and o C n in u pen JOn o� Hear1ngs or to Arc h jv the ~nst nt ca e w Jul y 27, 1' 7 <C.T.A. R cords, pp. 43-44). ithout o bjection on he p r ot r spondent, th1 ourt res olv d to rch~ve w1. ou pr ud~ce h t awa it th deci ~on of e Supre e Cou an th c e on r of u to s v . ~ourt o.:f T pp ala, e t. 1. , G. R. N:os. L.-4888 , 4887 a:nd 8888 � T. A. Cases Nos. 27 1 and 2832) h~ch a pending b ore i an 1nvolv1.ng the same s u s nd similar fac s h l.n an case. In the h n o� hl. c e or August 31, lq9J, petitioner's coun l niJ: sted tha h was al ready a ci i n b the upr me Cour n :tavor o:f pet ition r ~n the fore o ng case ho eve , t w s noted that he C ur h s no y t resolved res pond nt's Mo ion to D1.sm1.ss and pe i ion r's Manifestation and Mot1.on.
� RESOLU':IO C.T.A. C.SE 0. 314~ -3- :he ground re~ied upon by' respondent for moving �or t e d s. ss l of .the petition Ya~ lack of )Urisdict o i.r c !t w a t ed out o time. RespondEnt cl rly �t�blishe ha> follo .i.n ~ 1. On F' �bx u ry 1 , 1(. 77, pet::i t:.'..cme.~ 1.~ece.1.v "'� dec 3ion of the Co m1ssioner of Cu ~o~- d~t d J nu ry 31, 1977 d ~yizg petitA.one: �s pr test aga_n t the col.l cti.on of b rth n chargea �A n x A8 ) aforem_ 1977, pe'it1 ner filed a .;m �ider � t on o:f the Annex "8") 3. 2, 1980, petit1uner :..~ec&l. ved of the Comm~ssioner a{ Custom ., 1980 denyin th~ notion fo r n (An ex �'"'�> 4. On 1, .19 Or petitl.one~ f:i e ei or rev ev <C. 1'. A. Recorda. ...p. From pE"t i tioner. 't-! ecni t o..: the deci :inn on February H:S~ ... S'r! to t "" fill. ncr o.f thP nt::i on :for rPcon ider tic~ en . :rc 19'77 ~ e�tod of y ~-s alr a~y lap ed. P em pe i ioner's rec 1pt of re pond t� ord~r of deni .1 o� the reconsideration on upu 12, 1980 o .hP f1ling o% petition for revie '"'n s pte r 11, lq o,. ~ peri of ~o ~ays h ve lap .d. A t ;at 1 o:f 57 days have el .a'!!'d fro ::.ce:i pt o:f ue ion to he :!ili g of he e.i ion. s r,:,tion 11 of Republic c No. 1125 pro..,ides t t appeal :from d�ui:t:~ion 0 i~ne Commissioner of C11Bto s to t1e Court o:f T X ppeel~
j o. 31. 1 tb 1 d v tiu.n 30 y r r c pt o a ch p "t'on V rl. h v t Ci 0 0 p 0 0 o� ow� n r l. i r 0 n od h
� � 3141 -5 - entitled to hav that ot n r ol ed befor being 1~ Ul.r d t I � .t. ows, th zor , Yh r 0. - r rt d fil d. ot o .o dia.�a, th Court itho t ... olv1 ; Y U....(j he iTICUr C:t to decl e h �. .:.n ct v. " f r his :f ilt ~re �o :fi. e an new r it ld e t n ount to d i .l oi' du~ ( r n ... l c , i.s d of ourt, clum L yeo, o. 1. 2367). I 1 t. c a. at , n netic of he rin o.~ he .ot�on to di :f1l d en Octo:Of?r a otj . 2, 198 � ow v r, Co rt c date :f he r n o� 'b r 2, 1 80 in he Cur�' notic, pe ition r� counse
I .. 1 RESOLUTIO C.T.A. CASE 0. 3141 -6- appe e and rn""nifeated th t n dec:tsion on th �oreg n~ 1 ::.t:too.� s !:> h 1 ~yence inde~initely <C. � A ~ _c r � p. 42 >� The . u �po 0 notjce of tion i~ t b-1ng the p y into Cou ... the t me t.h 10 ion~ thereby ":'nabling h-'m to ppe r and conte~�t +h o~ <F.o nc:t o,. Rev1se mot..:. n .l. he ire ... do Rule o.f c :f c Volu l, p 856 cit.:i 'l . Am Jur., 0 ) hp po of th in r :rl.ng a thre -d y notic o� h- a ring :t moti to it.: "to id ri.,E::s u th 0 0 i�a . ;rty 1<. t. giv 0 t .... tt r to nd Tile thG' r ue t 0 0 io .( nc v. 1. � Janu l~y .. 0, 19&2>, .as ith. Fe-, plaJ. ti:f:fs be n yc pl.&.:.d ha - d t ch nc. to e ent nd n i'oc::t v rt .. c on to th& y did e their 0 otion t:.o d smis.... H rJ..ng on t otion t.o d~ 1 IE th \I!' b co uperflu' y. a surplus e. The> end of justice h ve be n S\: seJ�v d. nd the cou t� J.l r to note th t, on th d te o:f esrin 0 id p ... i n t i .i..s h d no no� ic~ her c. f. of rr r tho t r&,udi d ( nt 'o. 96o, 16 SCRA 2:7 .� h re r n 7 4J.
� RESOLUriOM - C.T~ ~ CASE RO~ 3 41 - "1 h ocnnot later complain that sufficient notice thereof aa not given him~ His action oonstit t&a a waiver o:t his right to due notice 'FranCJ..SCO, ~evised Rules o� Court Volu e l~ p. 859 citlng Southern Kut.o:t" ,. l:ru:.1orporated va. Gaw,. et. .1., � f.1. 15 c"'"'. Sup � --~:.3). In '! ca. "", hal the J.aw prohiuits is n t ~h bsence of pr~�ious nat~ce, Dut absol t~ ab �nee thareaf ~nd lac: o� opportunity to . 1 Phil. 72{ c ting Borja V' � 1'c n, 9"' Ph-.L. l"enol:i.o,. 93 Phl. � 782 >. In v:i. w o� the :for goJ.ng, We :find that the lr..c o.f no l. e o hesrinA ol r spondent'a mcti_n to o� heaiing is ued by this Co~rt in a~~ordance wito it Peti toner respondent's otio to by . t s man~�estat1on nd �atiun oppo~ing hP mo\ion to d.;.smisa nd th o;f peti. t1.oner' co' "sel in the h aring eL for the purpose w ere it was menJ.:f""s ed ha. decisio on said mot ona he d~f~rred. ol im t it no now ledge 0 respond .- t � no1~ i � a not ~eard .1n c ,u t. ~1 4 2
ESULUTI � � � 41 -8 - H REFO E, the inata t petition �or review is he b ord d di �o lack f juri diction,. h Yl.l' t l d b yond th r le nt ~Y riod. OJlJ)EREJ>. zon Ci y, :ro Man J , C!epte 4, 993. Pr J. � GRUB .Judg '?4:)
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.