CTA Case No. 3491 (Decision)

REPU BLIC OF THE PH IL I PPI NES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY PHILIPPINE POLYAMIDE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, Petitioner� ~ - versu s ��- C.T.A. CASE NO. 3491 THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, : < - - - -.. - �-�� ..... - � " ''' :�{ DEC I I0N T hi s s uit i.nvol ves a c: laim fo~ fun d of the total amount of P690~331.00 representing al l eged 5% in t en1,3 1 ta :-: C:D 11 :~C ted on pr,~ti t i o n er-� F'hi 1 ippim~ Polyamide Indu strial Cor� por-�a ti.o n ' s importations of r<:t W mater i ,:\ 1s for-� the per-�ind from July B, 1980 to January 7 , 1981. Petitioner i s a domE~stic c:Dr� pcn� a tion e:-: i s tinq under a nd by v irtue of Ph ili ppine l aws with office at Bo. M apa yap a~ Calamba, Laguna. I t is registered with the Board of Investments as a preferr ed pioneer e nt er p ris e u n der Rep ub li c Ac t No . 5186 for 77 1

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 349 1 2 the production of nylon 6 filam e nt. As a pr e ferr-e d pioneer enterpr� i'=�e, petitioner-� i s entitl e d to exemption from a ll national inte rn al reve nue ta xes, except income t a x, on a dimini s h i ng bas i s . For the period from July 8, 1980 to January 7, 1981, peti t.ion e r-� on seve r-�a 1 occ a s ions ma d e importations of raw mat eri als in i t s manuf a c t ure of nylon �f.i lament Y�3t"Tl S an d p <~i d th e 5/. inteTnal revenue ta:�: thereon in th e amount of F'690, 33 1.00 purs uant to Pres ident ia l Dec r ee No. 13 52 a s amended by Presidential Decree No. 1395. C 1 aiming hov~ ever that Presidenti a l Decree No. 1584 in r�elation to Executive Orde r No. 569 res tore d .its ta x exemption pr i vi 1 eg e s 1 r r1de1~ Repub 1 ic Ac t No. 5186 th e reb y exempting its importations from the 5/. internal r�evenue ta >:, p e titi c.m e r �fil e d its cl a im for refund with r.. e s pond e n t Comm.is s .im1 e r of In tern a 1 Re v enU�-:' and this insta nt petition for revi e w on July 8, 1982. Since no action se ason .3b 1y taken by respondent on petition e r-' s c 1a im for� r e fund, the parties s ubmit ted this c ase fo r dec ision, a fter hearing and s ubmiss ion o f e v idenc e, o n the iss ue of 78 J

DECI S ION - CTA CASE NO . 3 491 - 3 -- whether petitioner is e:�:empt �f r-�om th e 5/. in t er n a 1 n?venue ( a dvance sal es ta:<) paid on the impor� ta t.i o ns in qw~stion and th e reby e n t i t 1 ed to a r e fund of the s um of P690 ~33 1.0 0. It ~:; eem s cle.:1r� th,:~.t und e r Republi c: Act No. 5186, particularly Sec tion 8(a) thereof, e n ac ted by Congre ss on Septemb e r 16~ 1967~ p e.:~ t ition e r-� c3. S a preferr-�e d pione e r� enter� pr-- .i.se , i s enti t le d to exemption from a ll n ati on a l i n t e rna l re venu e taxe s ~ e:�:cept in c ome ta:�; ~ on '"'� d .im.in i s h i ng b as i s as follows : (.t) One per cen t up t o De c e mb e r 3 1, 1972; ( 2) S e venty --�f .i v e pe r c e nt up to DF:> ce mber 3 1. , 1975; (:!. ) Fifty p el'" ce nt u p t o De ce mber 3 1 ~ 1977; (4) Twenty per c ent up to Dece mber 31 ~ .1979; a nd (5) Ten p e r c e nt up t o De c e mb er 31 , .1980 . However, on April 1978, with the promulgation of Presiden tia 1 De c: ree No. 1352, the ta:< - free importation privil e ge granted to petitioner as a pre f e rred pioneer e n te rprise und e r Republic: Ac: t No. 5186 ~-Ja s withdrawn and instead 79

DECI SION CTA CASE NO. 3491 ..... 4 - s ubject to a five per-cent customs dLlty a nd fi ve per-ce nt inter-nal r-evenue To quote per-tinent pr-ovi si on s of Pr-esidential Dec ree No . 1352: SECT I ON 1. A11 impor�ta ti.ons wh ic h a re pr-esently exempt fro m cus toms duties a nd I or- .in te r�n a 1 r- <~ ve~n t..t f.? t<-:l :�(e5 un c.1 e r. t. hr,~ fH"OV is .i t ' ' l S o f a ny qP n e r�� ,:~. 1 or- s pee .i. a 1 1 aws ~; ~H~ 11 b~ � r::.;ubj er.:: t to a 5 pe:~n:en t. c u 5 toms duty and ~:~ pet..cen t. in t er-n<:\ 1 r-eve nLle ta :�(es su bject to the s a me limita tio ns and condit ions pr-escri be d u nd er suc h l aw, if a ny . Th e d uty anc:l t:a:�( impo-:3!::d hr-,�r-e.i n s ha ll be c omputed in accordan ce with the a ppl ic::a bl e r-wovi sion s o �f th�i! Tar-.i. ff a n d Cu s t o ms Co de, as a mend ed, a nd t he Nati cm<~l Inter-nal Rev e nu e Cod e o f 1977, respectively. The c:: u ~. torns du t y a nd inter-nal r-evenue taxes imposed under th is s ec t ion s hall not apply to t he following irnpcJr-ta t..i. o rH;: 1 . Th ose wh ich ar-e exe mpt in pur-suance o f or in compliance with interna tional treati es or c::o mmi t me n t.s, s ue h as t he ADB-- FO:F' Has �t AcJ n~ernen t ( l. 9 66) ; t h P .1. 94 7 Ccmv f.:~n t.i.cm on Ptr� .i vi 1��? <;:Je ~ .:~ n d Immun ities of the Un ited Nat ion s and its spec: .ial .i. :~e d age:mt:ies; the Un i t. ed States (-~gEmc:y fa t"� Interna tional Developrnent - RP At.Jret�:~ m ~;mt; t he 1.947 i1ilit a t'"Y Bases Agree men t; and ot her similar treaties or commitments; 2. Those whi c h are exe mp t under Sec tion .1.7 cf Presi d e n tial DE-~c: r�ee No � 66; 80

DECISION ._ CTA CASE NO. 3491 --� 5 -- 3. Those whi c h are exempt under Section 12 of Preside ntial Decree Nn. 87; 4. Those which are e xempt under� Pr�esi dential Decr�e e No . 215; 5. Those which are exempt under Sec tion 1 of Presi de ntial D �~c ree No. 292 ; 6. Those which are e xempt under Presidential Decree No. 529; 7. Those whi ch are e xempt under� Bec: t ion 1 5 o �f F'resid!:mtia l D('~c r�ee 572; B. Those which are exempt � under Pn~si dential Decr�ee No . 604; 9. Those which are e xe mp t under� Presidential Dec re e No. 666; 10 . Those wh ich are ~xe mpt und er Section 76 o f Preside ntial Decree NCJ . 768 ; 11. Those which are exempt under Pn:?si den ti a 1 Dec r�e e No . 783; 12. Those which are exempt under Pr-esidential Dec r-ee No. 972; a nd 13. Those which are exempt under Section 18 of Re public Act No. 6234. SEC. 2. Th e per�t i rH:m t provisions of Pres idential Decr�ee No. 2.18, 81

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3491 - 6 -- Presidential Decree No. 269, Presidential Dec n:.~e No. 3tl8, Pr-esiden ti a 1 Decree No . 413, Presid8ntial Decree No. 440, Preside � ~ial Decree No . 535, Presidential D ~?c: r.. ee r.,o. 5~:.8, Pr�esidc~ntial Decree No. 634, Presi d e ntial Dec ree No. 681, Pres idential Decree No. 690, Presidential Decr-ee No. 926, Pr-esidenti a l Dec ree No. 990, Presi d entia l Decree No. 992, Presidential Decree No. 1159 , Republic Act No. 720, Republic Act No. 3470, Repub 1 ic Act No. 4156, B.f:?_[l,\.,_tt:J. Lt~.... . B. c;::.t .. J~g. ! . . � .~.J.8~. , Repub 1 i c Act No. 6135, Repub 1 ic Act No. 1161, Rep�..tblic Act No. 1370, F~epublic Ac t No. 26 40, Republic Act No. 305 4, Republic f.kt No. 4690, F~epubli c Act No . 4850, Republic Act No. 4071, and Republic Act No. 6042 are hereby repealed or amended according 1y. ( e mphasi s s upp 1ied) SEC. 3. All pertin ent p r ovi s ions of specia l c harters granting fran c hi se and/or s imilar provi s ions of other general and speci al l aws are likewise repealed or amended acco rdingly; Prov.ided, IH.Ho.J e ~' er, Th at the Pr�es.i.dent may, upon recommendation of the F iscal Inc e ntives Review Boa rd, declare a par�ticular- pr.. ovi s.i cm of <.:~n e:d.st ing law other� than those en urner�;O\ t ed in the-:� prece d i.ng pa~-� agraph as nD t am o ng thosr.;) l"�epea 1 <?d ot"� amended by thi. s par.. a gl"�aph. As a matt er of fact, as clearly and expressly provided in Sf.~c: ti.on 2 thet- eo �f, quot ed above, thE"J pel"�tinen t pn::>v is i o ns o�f Repub 1 ic: Pic t No. 5.186 e>:empti.on �from r.:~ ll nat.ion.::l.l inter�Tl <.~l. r-eve nu E! ta:�:es And to r-emove whatev e r doubt s as to 82

DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 349 1 - 7 -� the taxability o f a ll importations which were then tot a 11 y or p art i e\ 11 y e:<ernpt f r�orn c:u. s toms clu t: ies and/or internal revenue ta xes under a ny genera l or special lal'>~~ SE?c:tion 1 of F'r <?.side nt.i. a l Decr� e e No. 139 5, promulg.=~ted on May 31., 1 9 78 ~ rei tet- c'1.tf:> s i n c 1ear� and una mb ig uou s ter-ms: SECT I ON .t. F' n?.s i dent. .i. 21.1 Decrr--:!e No. .1352 is hen:.? by a mended to r�ead �follows: "SECTION 1.. Al 1 impot-t-� ations whi ch are at present to t a lly or partially exempt from customs duties a nd/or internal revenue tax under the provis ions of ,:;my gene r-a l or spec ia 1 1 a 1"' s ha ll be subject to a fi ve (5%) percent c ustoms duty and five (5%) percent internal revenue tax, s ubject to the same limitations and condition s prescribed under� such l a w~ if a ny . "In the case"? of importations enj o y i ng parti a l exempti on~ the sai d duty and ta x s h all bE' impose d o n t h e e:-:e mpt. pc:wtic.m in ad d .i tion to th e du ty and tax due on t he t ax able por�tion . "Th e duty and ta:-: imposed her�ein sha 11 b e cornpu ted in accordan �=e wi t h the app 1 ica b 1e prov isions of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines , as a mended, a nd the Natio n al In t.er�na 1 Rev e nue Cod e of 197 7, as amended, res pec tively. 83

DECI SION -- CTA CASE NO. 349 1 - 8- " S EC . 4. The pertinent provis ions o f the foll o wi ng laws ar-�e hen? by repea 1!=.! d or- a me nd eel accor�d ing 1 y ~ "(a) Pr�esi d e nt..ial De c r e e No. 2 18, as a me nd e d by Presidential Decree No. 348; II (b) Pt- esiden tia 1 De c: rc-:>e No. 41. :3; II ( C: ) Presidential Decree No. 4LI�O ; Dec:r-�ee d ) II ( Presidential No . 535; " (e) Presidential Dec r ee No. 538; f ) II ( Pr-esid e ntial De c: t-� ee No. 6 :::4; II ( g ) Presid e ntial Decree No. 992; II ( h) Pt-esiden tia 1 Decr-�ee No. 1159; i ) II ( Republic: Act No. 72 0; j II ( ) F~epub 1 i.e: Act No. 1370; II ( k) Republic Ac t f\lo. 2 640; 1 ) II ( Republic Act No. 3 470, as a me nded; 11 B_~P-'=!.9 .Lt~::._..Br,; .t .J~Lq..!._ .:::i)J?_9, ( m) ~.$. . __�.\_ffi�'.f.!Q~Q.. ; "(n) Republic: Act NcJ. 6J35 , as amendE:~d; �"nd 84

I DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3491 -- 9 �- " (a) Other genera 1 and spec ia 1 1aws , and s pecia l c har ters grantin g fran chises. ( e mphasis supplied) Peti tianer� how ev~".?r� .:u -gue s th a t P n-?side nti<:\1 Decree No. 1584, ~wamulg a t ed an Jun e 11, 1978, in conjunction with E ~ec utive Order No. 569 , impliedly repealed Pr�esiden t.ia l Decree No. 1352 , as ame nd e d by Pr-esidential Dec: t�� ee No . 1 395 , insafa1r� as th l'~ latter� seek s to impose the: 51. intE~r� n a l rev e 11u e ta:�~ on th e .irnpot�� tati o n ~:; .::~ ti ss U E' lll i'ld E~ by p e t i t .ion e l'.. , t o which f u l l ta:�~ e:�~e mpt:ion ~~~as e:< t e nded under said Pr� esiden t i a 1 Dt'? C: r-ee No. 1 ~:i84 and E::-: ec:u t i ve Or�der� No. 569, both of whi c l�t .:�It"�!;? J. at.c.:> r�� and ~;pE~cial enactments. P e tition er stresses th ~ t Pr es idential Decr�ee No. 1352 rwomulgab?d on Apr� iJ. 21, 1 978, a s amended by Pr� e side n t.i.a 1 Dt"?c: n~e No . .1 :3 95 dat e d May 31, .1978 which withdrew th e ta:�: e:�:r: mption granted to Baar� d of Invf~st. ments r�eg isten~ d enter-pr-ises under Republic Act No. 51.86, ear� ]. ier . enactments . According to petitioner, Presidential Decree Nr.> the exemp tion earlier withdrawn under P residential Dec ree No. 1 352 as 85

- DECISION -.. CTA CASE NO. 3491 -- 10 -��� amended by Pn�?siden t.ia l Dec r:�ee No. 1395. Being a later an d spcc?c.ial enactment, Pr�esi dential Decree No . 1~."184, in r� e lation to E:-: ecut.ive Or�der- No. 569, should prevai 1 ovet'" bot1 �1 Pr.. esiclen tia 1 Dec r. ee Nos. 1352 and .1 395. Insof a r pet'" tinent Pn?.siden tia 1 Decr-ee No. 1584, which took effe c t on June 11 , .1978, pt'" OV ides: S ECT ION 1 . S t:~c:t.i.o n 1 5 o r F~epubl ic: Ac: t No. 5186 .1.s h en:= by ame nci E?d by the addition of subsE:>ction s "q" and "r-", whi c h s hall read as follows: "q. Recommend to the President in meritorious cas e s , t he liber�a lizat.i.on of incentives granted by the Board for particular firms or specific industries under Republic Act No. 5186, Republic Act No , 6135 , and Presidential Decree f\lo. 1159; t: he Pn~~;ident. may in the interest of nation a l socio- economic de ve lopment, general welfare and/or national ~;ec: ur~ .i.ty lib e r a l i ze ince ntiv es for s uch par ti c ular firms or specific industr-ies by: (J.) extending the period of <'l.vai lment of incentives, which may be enjoyed only for a limited period; or (2) increasing the rates of tax exe mp tion s prescribed f or e nterprises regi s tered with the Board. 86

- DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3491 - 1.1. - II r. nf2CDmmend to the Pr�� eside.�n t ' who, in the interest of general welfare and development, may f.-~ l imina te ~ ,... E~duc: (;? o r. sus p end the enjoyment of any of the t ax :i.n c:t:?nt.ives a dmin .i�:;te r�� c-!d by th e Boc-~ r-cj o �f In ve~:d: men t s pn:Jv idt-:?d that suc h n?duction ~; hall not affect firm s previously regi~st.e r� ('~d or- appr��cJVE!cl by the Boar�� d pr .i.or� to !.::i Uc: h n :!cluc: tion. 11 Short J. y ther�ea f ter, thE�? ti�H?.n F'r�� esich:"?n t of thE-? Phi 1 i ppines on Novembe r� 23 , .197<~, pl.tr� suan t. to the above-quot~?d ~wov .i s.i.o n promulgat ed E:�:ec u t .i. ve Order� No. 569 he au t .hor�.i. zed t. hl?. Boar� d 0 �f Inves tments not to recommend, but to ac t.ua l l y E�?N tend the p ~" r.. .i ocl of incf:~n t i ves by any �for c:\ period not eNceeding five (5 ) years an d/or increase the e:�:emption of r �eg i s te red p.ion e el~ en teqJr�.i ses. Upon request of petition er, the Board Investments dur� .i.n<J ih:; rnr'"!e ting on l''lar�c:h 20, 1980 eNtended the time within which petitioner can e n j oy ta:�: e:�:emptions uncler� Secti.cm B(a) of Republic {kt. Presidential Decree No � .1584. (F:-: h . J, p. 60, CTA 87

DEC I ~3 I Of\! --� CTA CASE f\10 . $ 3491. To quote the Board of In v estments' letter of March 26, 1980 to petitioner : 1.980 March 26 Philippine Polyamide Indus trial Corp. Suite 701 Ermita Center Ro:-:as Boul F~vard Man.i.l c:1 Attenticm: M.r.:..!. _fi ~"'rrtgJ:l ...b..� .. .L..: �? ~ Pre~;iclen t Gentlemen: The Board dur�ing i t s meeting .l ~::~ s t March 20, 1980 appt- oved your� requt:~st for- an extention in time within whi c h to enjoy t:a:-: e:-:empt.ion s under- Sec. B(a) of R.A. 51.86 at increased e:-: empt:ion ratf.~s~ pursuant to P.D. 1584, as follows : 8..�\..t. ~ ...m . . . r:;.,!:Lf?..[!,l_pj; i...QD. E:.(:~ r i,q d 100/. Up to Dec: e mber� ~H 1.98/.l 751.. to ' De c:E?mber� 1986 50% Up to ' ~::; 1 1988 20/. Up to December 1989 ~:.1 Up '' Dec: ember� ~::: 1 It is under-st ood th <:"l t the BOI reserves the right to withdraw, terminate or reduce, at any time the extended period and/or incre ase d exemption benefits~ whenever in the opini o n of the BOI~ your firm no longer n ee ds such ~::~~;s .i s t a nce. Please be guided accordingl y. Very truly yours, H. ZAYCO Gtlvernor Since Presiden tia 1 Dec r�ee No. 1352 issued on April 21, 1978 and Presid�mtic.d Decr.. ee No. 1395 88

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3491 -� 13 -- pr-omulgated on !"lay ::H~ 1978 had alr �eady withdr-awn petitioner-'s ta:-: fr�ee impor� t,~tion pr- ivilege i.\S a pr-efer-r-ed pioneer enter-prise under Republic Act No. 5186 and insh~ad :;ubj ec ted i t tcJ a five per-cent customs duty " rid five per-ct?nt intenH:\1. r-evenue ta}:~ obviously~ theta:-: e:-:emptions of pe:?t itioner- under- Secticm E3(a) of Republic Act No . 51.86 cannot anymore be e:-: tended. Pr eside ntial Decree No. 1352 imposing a five pe:?rcen t customs ancj five percent inter-nal revenue t.a:-: in lieu of t h E� duty and/or ta:-:-free import c:1t.i.nn pr�ivilege i~.; very c le <.:\ r and e:-:plicit on this point. Section 2 and Section 3 and c learl y pr�ov i de , respectively, that the p er� ti.nen t rwov i sicms of Presidential Decree No. 5186 and a ll pertinent provisions of specia l c har� t.�,.n; gr�,,m ting f r��.:;~. n c hi se and/or similar provision s of othe r gen era l and special laws are otherwise repe a l ~ d or amended accordingly. Tht'? pertinent provisions of Pr�es id�-mtial Decree No. 1584 ar�e very s pec if i.e a nd mandatory. "Recommend to the Pr�esident in meritorious cases, the liberalization of in centi ves granted by the Board for par-t: icu 1 .:~r� f i r-rns or spec ific indus tr� ies 89

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3491 -- 14 -� under Republic Ac:t l\lo. :.'H86 11 , but. t:h r:.! r� c~ is no mor� e inc: en ti ve to . i. ben:11 i ze bec:aus�-? pet .i. t.ioner�' s tax--� free impor� ta tion pr� i vi 1 e ge under� Repub 1 ic Act No . 5 186 had already been wit.hdr�awn by F'r� e~;icJ Emtia l Decree No. 1352 on Apr��il 21, .1.978. Then , by 11 ( 1 ) e~:t.ending the per� iod of availment of incentives, which may be enjoyed only for a limite d pe riod; or ( 2) inc r� F.Yasing t h e o"f t a :�: e:�:empticm prescribed for enterprises registe red with the Board 11 � Howe ve r, Pr es idential Dec r e e No. 1. 5 8'1� cou ld not have e:-: tend e d thr:-? ta:�: �-?:�: e mpt.icm pr� ivi l E~ ge of petitioner under Republi c Ac t No. 5 .1.86 s inc e the per�tirH�m t pr�ov i s .i o n �s of Repub l i. e Ac t No. ~H8 6 on this matter- of ta:-: e :-:e mp tio n h ave a lre."'.l. dy been repealed upon the promul g ;::~ ti o r�; of F'reBid�m t ia 1 Decree Nos . 1352 a nd 1395 on April 21, 1978 and May 31, 1978 respectively. If we ar e to adhere, a s we shou 1d, to the co mmon 1y ar.:c: e pted mE? em ing of wor� d s in consonanc e with s ettled rules of i nterp r etation, the very logical v i.e�w i s that you cc:mnot l i b e r� alL?:e an inc en ti ve or� e:�: tend a p er� iod which has a 1 ready been r�epea 1ed. The rule i s well S E~ttl e d th :3. t cmr? ~-~ho c l a ims to be e:-:empt fr�� om th e payrn �~:�n t o f a p ar ticular ta:�: 90

DECISION -- CTA CASE NO. 3491 -�- 15 �-- must do so under clear and u nmi s takable t e rms f o und in the statute. Tax exemptions are s trictly construed against. the ta:�:payer�; thr.~ y being highly disfavol~ed .::tnd may almost bE? said "to be odiou s to the law". He who claims an e:<emption mu s t be a ble to point to some pos itive provi s ion of law c rea ting the r� ight; i t c a nrtot bE? i�:dlow E-~ d to e :d ~-; t up o n a mere vague impli ca t i on or inferen ce . (Asiatic Petroleum vs. Llan es , 49 Phil.. 4 66 , 471; Union Garment Co. , Inc. v~;. Co u r t o f Appea ls, L- 16809, ~January T l , 1962 , 4 S CI~A 30 4� ; Ph i lippine AcetylEme Co., Inc:. vs. Commi ss iorH? r. of Int e rn a l Revenue, L- 190707, Augu s t 17, 1967, 2 0 SCF\A 1056; Republic Flour Mills, Inc. vs. Commiss i o ner of Internal Revenue Revenue, L-25602, Februa ry 18, 1970, 3.1 SCRA ~~ 2 0; Comm .i. ss i em E�?,.... of Cu ~:; t o m s vs . Philippine Ac:etylE!nC-? Co . 8( Court o f Ta:�: App e.:~. ls, L-22443, May 29, 1971, 39 SCRA 7 1; Dava o Light and Power Co., Inc:. v s . Comrn i s~=; .i one 1�- of Cust o ms , L- 28902, March 29 , 1972 , 44 S CRA 1 22 .) The right of ta:�:ation will not be h E>Jd to hi:\Ve been surrender�ed un 1ess the intention to surTender is manifes ted by word s too pl a in to be mistaken (Ohio Life Insurance 8( T!-u s t Co. v s . De bolt, 60 Hm�1ard, 91

-u - DECISION CTA CA SE NO. 3491 - 16 - 416), for the state can not strip itse lf of the mo s t essen tia 1 power of ta:�:a tion by doubt fu 1 wor-cj ::; ; it cannot, by ambiguous language, be d epr ive d of this highe s t a ttt..�ibut e �::Jf :mVE"J r�e-:~ .iqnty ( E ri E.~ F\ a ih'I <:\Y Co. vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 21 Wallace, 492, 499). So, whr:! n e:�:empt.ion i s c laim ~~ d, i t must b e shown indubitably to e:�:i �s t, fnr� e ver�y pr-es umption is against it, and a well-f oun ded dou bt i s fatal to the c 1aim ( Farr inqton vs. Tennessee & County of Shelby, 95 U.S. 679, 686). (As iatic Petroleum Co. vs. Llanes, 49 Phil. 466, 471; Manila Electri c Company vs. Comr.1i ss ioner CJ �f Internal F\evenue, L-29987 & L-23844, October 22 , 1975, 67 SCRA 351. ) WHEREFOF\E, we find no mer i. t. in the instant petition �fo l and the same is hereby dismissed at petitioner's costs. SO OF\DEF:;:ED. Quezon City, t1et.n:> l"lan.ila, 11 ar-c:h :31, 19B'.f. ~-di,~�~ AMANTE ILLER F'n:!s .i.dir g Judge 92

-- DECISION - CTA CASE NO . 349 1 - 1 7 '"" WE CONCUR: ./ ',.(#"".._ NTE 6. R~QUIN A g socia t.eX:.~tdge REYE Ass oci atE'! ,Jud e CERT I F I CAT I 0 N I hereby ce t-ti fy that this decision wa s reached afte r du e co ns ultation a mo n g t he members of the CoUI'"t of Ta ~ App e al s in acc orda n c e with Section 1 3 ~ Art ic l e VIII of t he Constitut ion. Q~~i1/~ -~ AMANTE ILLER Pr�es:i. d ing Judg e Court of Ta x Appeals 93