CTA Case No. 3796 (Decision)

'� REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS Ol..JFZON CITY YVETTE TRADING CORPORATION, C.T.A. CAS E NO. 3796 r:�(;~ t .i. t .i.o ri f:? ,,- , HON. RAMON J. FAROLAN , .in h.i ~;:; c apacity Cornm i. ~:;,;; i oner-� of Custom ~; , F\F~ s p �;�>rlcl 0.' 1"l t . ~�.: DE C I S I 0 N r:�,., l::. i. t :i. CJI'lf.) l.. ~:; (.~ E' 1:: �:;:; to (:; u rnm .i.<;�. ,.., :i.nn E:' r.. o 'f Cu<=:; t .( .l fll :�:;' d c:~c i s; io n f::) F~ ..i.. ~~ I.J. I'. C�~ r I!(�~ p E~r- t :i. n E~ n t . p i��nv� .i. ::;_;j o n <.> o �f a n cl S EC . 253 0. Prop e rty Subj ec t to Forfeiture Under Ta riff and Customs La w. fn An y a I'" t:..i c:: 1i7? t h i'? .i. rnp o r- t a t ..io n e x por ta tion o f wh.i c:: h .i s f.'0 f fe e t ed 303

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3796 2 attempted contrary to law, or any article or prohibited importation or exportation, and all other articles which? in the opinion of the Colle~tor have been used, are or were entered to be used as instruments in the importation or exportation of the former; 1. Any al'��tic: lf.:~ sou~]ht to tJr.:? impor-ted ol'" e :< po ,,. �t.c-:~d : (3) On the s trength of a false declaration or affidavit execwted by the owner, impo~ter, exporter or con - signee con cerning the importation of such a r�� t i. c: 1 t!:? ; (4) On the strength of a false invoice or other document executed by the owner, j.mporter, exporter or consignee conc~rning the importation or exportation of such article; an~ (5) Through any other practice or device contrary to law by means of which such articles was entered thr�ough a cus;tomhou~:;E~ to the prejudice of the ~JOVE~rnmen t . The material facts are relatively simple. On May 6, 1983 the subject shipment arrived on boar��d the vessE?l "MV EVER F'IDNEEii" under� R<,gistry No~ DPS-024 covered by Bill of Lading No. KLGMNI of 304 ,\

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3796 ~) ..... Evergree n Marin e Corporation and consign ed to claimant Yvette Trading Corporation u"f .l'-1� 1.3. de J es u s St.~ Caloocan City, Metro Manila. Upon Cu ~; t:.( :Jm s :in ~; p pc::tio n <=" nc:l e :-:amin c.:1 t.ion the 400 gross s hoe buc kles 25 bags shoe buc kl es (400 per bag or 70 gross ) 2,400 c:lz s hoe s ole s 84 cartoon s (1,150 dz) shoe -;.:;o 1 r,~s :?00 r-cJ 1 l ~;; nylcm 44" 4-00 r��o 1 1 s rl '/ l em 4LJ. " :l.::'.i O r���n l J. ::~ nylon 60" ~) 00 rolls r1 y lon 60" 20 roll s nylon tricot 20 rolls t ric ot with y~i t. h foam fOi.":\ iTl One (1) unit shoP Drlco~ ( l) u n .i.. 1:: shof::c pun c h.i.nq rn<:,\c: h inr-::' punc:h :i.n!J rn i::~c h:i.n E�? Ten (10) b ~ gs rivets (4,750 pe s/ bag or 330 q r �o ~o- �:;:; ) 41b c<:,,r�� t.oorJ <:;:. "fi.ni. s:, h E1d sa ne! :":.l. l e_; ( 100 pcs/c: t.n Ol"' 16, GOO pe s.) Accordingly, seizure proceeding was instituted against the shipment for violation of the Customs After- due hearing the Collec:tof o"f Customs of the Port of Manila decreed the forfeiture of the 30

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3796 4 entire shipment for being gross ly misdeclared (S.I. No. '1-42 ..��83 ) . And be ca use of the glaring gross di sc repa ncy between the articles so declared a nd as actually found, the res pondent Commi ssion e r of th e ~ollector's deci sio n (Cu s toms Case No. 84-17, May 30, 1984). In i':l~:.!::;aJ.. l :i. n ~J the va lid i t y of the decree o f p etitio n er-c l ai mant <:.\ve 1���:; 11 d i ~;c I'"(;) p <:ln c: y i n artie 1 e~:; a nd '. c'.'\C tual ~:; l� li.pOlf:? nt ~'\IdS du e to thE? mi ~;-�-s h .ip m E~ nt o �f the in lieu of certain raw materials but n ot inc: l Ud E?d in th E? ~; hi.prn e~ nt., a mistake not imputable to pet itioner" . "to cif.-?pr i ve loca l man u �f ac: tur.. r:? 1���s "bad luck " is much con sequence , es pec ially in thi s times of crisis nor is there justifiable reason to continue withholding said raw ma t er ials and rendering a sector of the industry par�a 1 yzed." We reach the s.::1me con clusion as the respcmden t � s . The apparent quibble on a mis- s hipme nt. can hardly be a reassuring prospect that can easily recon c iled with the statutory 30G

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3796 in t e ndmr:?n t. Far be it from a cb medy of errors the ;::; tu. �ffing ne ither nor�� unprofe ss ional and ~...,h :i.ch thE? parties concern just t.u he~ k n o 1�~n ~ t hu ��:; , t. t. II hE') �fir���~:; the-~ cont:.aint-~ r'"� cor \t. ain(~?d undr::? c l <:\ r���c~ d items (finishe d sanda l s ) while t he second h0lf contained d r::~c 1 a r�� (~~( �l .i.. t.(;~>rns ( n y 1 on rna l:. r-:? r� i a l s ) � s t.tc h .:~ ,,.,,,,,,y th c:\t. <;Jr�t:~.-,,t c�ffnt��t is l"lE'C�?d (:-~ d to be <':\ble f.3uc::h mannr:? r'"� CJf c; t�.u. ff.ing th�~ c on t�.;:,, i ,., <::~ r-� van ~ , .l ~.;; to t. he::.� , s und E~ r-~;.i.q ! lf?cl mind an .indicium of a ~;c: hr-::>me to :i. t. <.5 law�ful ( Co l 1e c t .rl r�� ' s d E? c:: i s :i. r:J n ) ., I r\f"\ DC uuu~:; a nd l r-:~ ~;s of furt"."i.vc-~ ~:; iqn .i.f.ic<::\n\ : ~''.'!1 br��oo k ~:; r1n i n s tant mxculpation . F'E' 1'" 1"\ i :\ p c,; .i.~; r1ot.h.i.r1q � '��,r-:? m.i. s ����::; h :i. prrH0n t:. l:1u t . t hr-:? r��c! J.s nothing i ngr ati0t. ingly right eit h er and th E:> f<.\C:t .is t.tv':\ t the law has been violated. Such specie of dodging of the mould as the case at bar was not propititious then, it cannot, now. Upon the records before Us there is nothing to take the c ase out of the operative effects of the statutory proscriptions as understood a nd a pplied. 000 '"{"1

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3796 - 6- The circumstan ces o b tai n i ng have c l ear l y brought t hR petition er's s i t uation wi th i n t he cavea t enjoi n e d i n Section 2530 o f th e Tarif f a n d Cu s t o ms Code whic h exp l icit l y d i rects the f or f ei tu re o f suc h goods, t h e im por t atio n of wh ic h i s e ff ec t e d or atte mp ted co n tra r y to l aw. WHEREF OR E, the petition i s wit ho tJ t mer i t a n d t h e sa me is h ere b y dis missed wit h c o s t s a g ai n s t t h e petit i on~r. SO ORDERED. Que z o n City, Met r o Ma n i l a, Ma r c h 30~ 1 98 8 . WE CO NCUR:

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3796 �-� 7 CE RT I F I CAT I 0 N I certify that t hi s decision was re~cherl a fter due consulta ti o n a mong th e mem bers of t h E! Cm.wt. of Ta:-: Appe<::\l s in <~c:c:or- danc e \-J i t h f:)(;?c:t.io n 13 , Art i c l e VIII of the Constitution. AMANT E I L.L.EF\ P r��e~;i.cl .i. g ~Judqe Court of �Ta x Appeal s 30v