CTA Case No. 300 (Decision)

; � T. A. - versus - x- .. - - .. � � espondent. - - - - - - :x UE I I 0 his is nappe 1 i . erpo d by the pet t "o r , Philippin Lon n� tance T 1 phone ~o p ny , k � n th revers 1 of a d c ~ion of the r spond t 1 o rd of Tax PP - 1s of co1od c �ty , ~ust � n � n t v l �d �ty , cell ction ~nd rcf~s 1 t of I 1 st t t x s inclusive o 1e a1 inter ~ r r of said city in h a ounts of 3 , 93. 89 , ~5 . 27 nd 1 , 842. for the yo rs 1953 , 19 4 ~ncl 1955 , r spec- ive1y , on th ook v luc of p t t "on r ' s c ntr of� fie uip . ents , t 1 p on 1ires , poles , nho1 s , condu it , ter i n ls , drop wir s and cth r � n~t 11~ tions a ou t in~ to 1 4 , 21 . 00 used � n tho op r t on of its elephone syste in s � d c ty. 1he f(l lo in f ct s appeDr to be ncontrov rt d ro. t he plea in s s 11 as the evidence pres nt d y both parties . The pet i t i oner hcrc � n is a corporat �on duly or anized and exi t n nder t he 1 ws of the Ph l i p� pines. inca 1928 and p to the present tim , 1 292

-- . A. J �...., .... � / .. 2 - h en t hold r of franch� un .r .ct .o� ~4....6 ith ut .ori l to Gt aintein and ope- rat tele ho s rvic s , pl n an 5 lla i ons throu out th rchi eln o p rt�culG i . lnr rax App 1 of i ci 'I n p y the Gov r ont to coll ct r al a t X or ara 1953, 1954 nd 1 5 on h 00 ol 0 pro rt tion. ilh p rtioa ~r gr e that h p t�tione.:r er .. in do not n 1 nd~ n r in 1n olo ity on h ch t 0 ld 0 pal-' r 1 t X s. 1 nd and llf.ld �n c tr enta e.r~ t . or ly in h elon t o one ntonio .-. n t ition p y y rent 1 for the u of th PI~ises by virtue o a c on- - . tract of easo, Exhib t N, ..1, and - 3 (pp. 293

o. - 3- 75 c. T. A. ree.). The outsf.d inst 11 tiona such as poles ood n, croosot d , truseon or cooer te) , cables ( aerial a d un erground), manhol s . conduit. e:r inals and tho ires supporting the pol S KOO 0 y or drop w!rei. install d .. ither on OVft n 8 o nGd r., land3 or land b lon~�ng to loe 1 iden'ta to 0 l petition r pays r ntels by virtue of its v )"' al or wri n contracts of lease ith t 1 ndowners. The only ss:..te er& c lle upcn to d~c ide i n thi& ppeal s wheth r or not the roperti � o the petition r ov -d scrib , t king n~o con~ioeration the condition in hich ~hey were ins~a ie r ~oca~ du tn the ears nder rev , could oe cl t~.ovabl o real prop rties or the purpose o � poGing r 1 e t te t :x s tn r nn �� t, e ity Treasurer 0 colod ity itn 1e a net �on o the re nt 0 1&X ppeal 0 that c1ty in r Ct C si- the in ust fica,ion of the en a d co - lcction of t re 1ty tax s noi1f 0 0 r fun � In trying to justify the npo t , respondent � COIJO l r ues that the Charter of colod ty, u ore particularly ection 29 of onwe lt ct o. 26, a n o onweal h ct o. � .u rates t e pro erti � t at iir x tpt ro taxation n sine properti s sought y th p titioner to be ax pte ro4l r lty exes are not aentioned h .rein , follow- i ~he r 1 rul of stat ory constr ctlon �-x- pressio ius Est �xclusio Alt rius" , said proper ies are there ore de exclu ro. the xe"' ption. 294

... , .. 4 . � - .. e pond nt ' c un el furth contcn s t ven nd 1' thtl nt l , ore p rticularly c ion of o on c th c o . 4 0 , nhi h n . - fro r al t. t xe� , no er.tion . tso f t proport� s herein sought to ) e �e-P d , n t.:ir , follo Y!n the cardin l r le o st t tory con ~truction jus tionttd , said prop rtiQG l .. \,;h re or XC ae fro. it one .. l.t � La$t.L � r pond nt � coun 1 '.l rn in o fn t 'l � � pr n ipl 0 constr ct i o1 t hc.ot 'tn rticlo 416 nd 17 0 Ci 0 orat t he pr op rtl a f ll:l.n hc t i on o � p rson l or 0 .'.. nd th prop rt1 s r in 0 h o tJe 1y xea r not . lo y� nerGfo.r , prop rt1 n t� er or 0 � r 1 o:: 01 j c or l. t X ... thorou ly th of rovio.~ion th 1 ci y ouns 1 n fi I no ct r o i y, or p r icul r y onw l o. 26, d fin 'tn �r� 1 est � l �h r i d ch t r , we find in he Ne Civ 1 'od , cone s cl saific - tion of pro ertl�a to s ve ood o s�pp nt l uide n t h 8885$ t end 1 vy of real est te t x 1 by the ~ity ssesaor , Clty frees r r r ity o rd of . ' 29 5

� - !) - T x App, 1 � u ction 27 o t h rt ses the ter 'r 1 estat " in its g n ral nd cc pted .ean- in pr a ly n reli nc of h clcss1f cation 1- re dy o ed 1n the ivil o � .hlle i t 1 r � that under tfon 2 of h rt r, th r s list th rein properti s t nder cert in con tions fro re lty t X , o v�ousl , th X n r f rs only to 1 nd n 11 lngs, a d nts h ch yond ue tlon r 1 or ov 1 t s nd r the prov!s on of t eC v'"l Cod ue , pl nts, ro ~in fr nd onu nts tt ched per n ntly to h 1 n and fo n nt 9 al rt of n OV 1 � I 9 ch too unr s n bl to ect , r pond nt �s co nsel ee to ~t. th t th 1 hould , in the c 11 cation of r ert�l let s G y for r lty tax e 11 th � n r t to th nu t t .1 of p tf.ttoner n ord r to nt tle h 0 on. This b e OS the ~ surd p t .. c arly to consid r s n th pr s nt c r cert in pr rti h"ch might e cla ai� 7(\f ' 1 ith r eire t r 1 or open in en the ct al thtir ' oc tion , nat re n ncor- per tlor:. � ~ max m spr asio Un st xcluslo 1- t riu r r t c ution n t pplic t on an 1n 11 c ca 1 only mder cert in con ltion 2 u rl n t tutory on&truc ion Srd � $ c. 17 p. 418) . t 1s ful ly ;l! u1d in deter 1n1n t h p:ro abl ntention 0 h l e lilatu:r� , and it . ., 29 6

- O�CIS 4 � 300 C, . A. C .. 6 - ho 1 be clearly ppare t , in any particu a cas , t at th� legisl ur id not in act int nd hat it& IJCP.I'I S n'tio 0 one thio j.oul op rate san xcluai o of .all o h r , en X t iv y 2a>)Y. ( 1 c on Int p tion 0 � 2nd d� pp. � rne provis ons o nt ... ' or particular!/ ctlon 0 ct o. , c it y ponden � count 1 �n ppo_t of h. t � are not pplic 0 c5 - tion 2 of id Act expres ly p properties into (1) immova 1 or realJ or (2) ov le or personal. Listed aa ova le or real property undex Article 415 of the same Code, hich we cons! r ,. 297 ,

- 7- as the ne rest approach nde vhich the respondent oard might perhaps cl1n to , an in&ist in , t& cl���lf!cat1on of petitioner' s properties as !, ov- ables for re lty tax purposes , ar the follo ng: {1) Land , buildings , roads nd &tiuctions of 11 rt" s a 1ere 0 so it ~t ter ~n lyzin c ~�fully t e a ovo- ~J ot~ provisions, w t in , ho ever , t none f th is applicable to pet t i oner' s case. he centr 1 o~ l e uip n a outsi in- ttallat!ona of pe !tioner IUC u& i ts pole , cone :t , terminals. cab~ s , ra � io nhoJ s c n� not be eonsi�erea o as to . a�e fall within 'the pu v raph 1 , rtic l 41 �� of the ivil o e . .......;;.;;.;;o.,.,._.....,.r.;;;;.;:;......, gcnel:ally ref r to big � rov uent which � ve o u1dur o the process of uil ing , coni uc i on au x c~ion or (xtenslvo repairs and a era ott (H s"' Int r national Dictionary, 2nd 1 ions pp. 498- , Vol . � or ds an Phraaea)., e aettin up o Gti ~ioner � s central ~2 9 8 I

-- � -- off ce e ip nts !nsid a r nt u.tld ng . th di in of anholes and u ~in up o 1 phone pole� e not ct of const c on , or er tlort ea th t ~ s a e co o~ly a d ~n�r lly Ul .. ei her co ld cl sify p ti lo r' pr - �� per ie ova le nder p r p t f . uti 1� o he v11 � Te at ova � to i .ov bl property in r for r could � cla sifi n r th cat ory ttac nt or incorpor t � 1n fixe � i ch y t :1 . r f o 1 ou n 1 or of h r. ri1 . 1v11 Co ) r o fie of p t ft ion r orth 9 , ... 4. 1 t 11 in�! r nt d 1 - d nd lld n ol d i y 0 in to on st n, 11 no in t l c nt ct of 1 - � xhibit , -1, nd -3 (� .r .t�. c. t th t thor ! n provl ion o v r her in vin.. th 1 or th ri ht pprop 1 t f r lf tl c ntr 1 of c ip- tion of th nty� y r ! e. T is c i !ndic th t int ntion 0 0 ! Pr i d prop t p or nd th rofor r o a le y th see pon h xpir ti.on of h contr c o le � cont o h con r c o 1 � th l ��� ' very r1 ht pen t. t r in tion o 299

- � -- " -� 300

- �"'I" I C . � � t-- v~ ~ � ..., - 10 - 0 cu n kno le g that h polos , con- du1t , wir � iowents ano otner appl ances o the tition co ... s e c � it l r leo are mov d c nm h for. con- venienc 0 o er p 1 c;. 00 , c ~�eo pol s , .tr an other i nstaJ.lcatl.O'\ 0t 1 h re on s ith e (I sp c .l uip.1 n a D vi c ou ' � 1� �u: .n 0 tl e l.' proper y to 1ch they are ~ � r r o o , tic � 1 0 ttl ew Civi ode S JUS a i pplicable to petitioner' pr pert1et or t e purpo OJ: cl s sifjing th �� i 0\1 or re ltv p rpos a �he other t 0 p ra.. ...ra tS quot v � I or r t at c p1:a or to n pi ce oi Ui din consid re as .. o- va l e u pa~a ~. ( veo i ll � o. y � illo 61 Ph 1. . hi � ) i te v � Cu Unjleng oth arties, th� ip tt , po e an ot tti p arac.u pet.lc oner no in estion ar installed on publ c nd pr v t property a the petitioner herein has no land or 301

D.,...;I ! N � � 1. . A. � S � - 11 - .... i.ldin of its own �n c:.c clod .;.ty . One who is en aged in he opcr tio nd a �.nten nee of a tele- one ys c y virtue o a fr nchise cam ot b sai 0 nt.a.. - 1 an v or trade. I l~phone Go y iG COr!: on c rri in the me s n..,e s a elc r aph co.p ny , d ' t has cert in e l - ~ ined obli~ations of a p bl "c charuct r. I t is pu l i quas corpox tion. ( yze V5. C �ty Of- onro t o 92, ;;) � t '"'8, 16 L" . 643; ock tt s. te 5 .~;. l-8, 1 5 , 10~ Ind. 2~ � \ p . 2:)1. ) r ~ t.o n tura of pet "t "oner ' s proper- :Les ; U e s for ~hie h 9y ar � t nd d nd th � t p :r: .t y t to Dub ic � n pr "v t nt not b ion � to pet "t "on ; the ~ nt nt n of the Lc~ isla ur ~hen �t r nt the frunch $ Jnd r c th mov bJo~ s bj ct t o l cation or r the �nt ~nt " on of pctl .i oner n t l_ssors ot l;nds nd b ild ' n on h"ch they arc ~nst 11 d n cons� the~ as such; n , tl poss b �l�ty oft ir a �on f � t u Jding or lands en .l:ch t ey re nntoll d w t out r o n h or ithout the ~~ 1 pro .rty to which they are f.:x d, the ore ppropr'ia G ro is � on of luw � appl �c b h . c "S..:if c tf on .6 p r.nra h 4 , 41 th \ C v 'l. Cod 1ich r ods ES foll c "Th follo ng thin s are d e ed to bv oer - son 1 prop rty: X X 302

-- . r. � E � -1 - ( ) In 11 thin s whic d. in p r on l cr ov bl prop rti s , th r ea- rd of x Appeal of d c�ty err d, th refore , inc! ssifying petition r ' prop =t ov bl e d n asses ~ 1n nd coll cti re 1 t t t x th r on for the ye _re 1953, 1 nd 9 � tth no t h p t tion for v cl a� for r fund n to 1 91.36 1 1 ed to th y r 3, 954 nd rn t e t~!al of t � c v d nc of p nt c ns st- 1n o off c l c xh t H, , J n (pp. 41- C.T�� r c.) tro cc to h pe 1 ion p d 3, 93. 5 � 7. 1 ,84 . ena 42. 20 or total of 7,733. 6 for t 953, 19 � :1.9 d 195 , r p ct v l � or n m, t p tition r o k th r f nd of 7,133.56 in d of , 691. 6 pry d for n �t p tit � on or v � h!le it i e t at as n ral rule is not alle in th pl ngs c t he o 0$ t party , th Co�rt last r ce pt of p ym nt , X it (p. � in the a. ount of , 2. for h y r , th r eln no o j ct on t oounse t v!n a11 d to ppea urin e rial o - wlthstan in the ct that th y er not fied ontha in advance of the schedule hearin � ven in is . , 303

.cC S � - 13 - l eventh hour ll e�. orandu Ol' the apotl ant as wel aa !n his n ojol.nd .t� to th� eply to espon� dent ' � e o~ nd � ' , pon ent' coun el hae no� eationed the inclusion of this a dition�l it in petitionex ' a o an~u nor the admits on y the ' ourt o ~he o ic al eceipt , xhib t � 1 X� hi i app~ara t Q e genuine in every reap ct nd there is no dou t that he o nt of re 1 at t tax reflecte vin e n ai 1: pro t tn said exhi it , was on the asis of the sa e proper� tle� b c~ of this appeal. or the a e o expe- d enc: y n o vol ,ultip11c1 y of suits , we have ecided s to eonai � an re,olv he s ctu5 of t is addition� � i h tore oin cons�d - rations, the aec1sio o the r ar o... ax Appeals o ity app ale fr a h ro y - - vera � d he 1r asurer ox p tit:toner, Diatane ele ny t nta o .' 5~. 27 . 1, 4~. ancs � 42. or a ctnl of 7, 7 3. 6 epr sent ng r & es at ax b nu p lty no 1 o, , p iv ly , illegally d collecte oy yhe trea r r of acolod Cit , ith 1 g intere t h r c fro t he dat s the respec ve ounts were nd ce1v y the l tter ( 'ct:rc�r la t o. va. Coll ector of In rna! evenue , � � o. L� 304

- �� T. A. - 14 - 9257, Octob r ?7 , 1956) , w:thout pronouncem lL as to costs. 0 0. ER D. f. an .la , Philipp � nes , June 29 , 1957. I .� 'U1 L ssociat Jud e concurs and dissents in a separate opin on. .. 30 5

r J J I ~HILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COl1PANY, Petitioner, - versus - C. T. A. CASE NO. 300 BOARD OF TAX APPEALS OF BACOLOD CITY, Respondent. X- - - ---- ---X CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION I concur in the opinion that office equipments, telephone wires, poles, manholes , conduit, ter- minals, drop wires and other installations valued at �184,218.00 owned by petitioner and used in the operation of its telephone system in Bacolod City are not subject to the real property tax under Commonwealth Act No . 326, the charter of said city. I dissent, however, \dth respect to the order directing the City Treasurer of Bacolod to refund the sum of �7 ,733. 56 , which was paid by petitioner as real property tax on the pro- perties mentioned above for the years 1953, 1954, 1955 and 1956. I shall state my reasons very briefly. This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals (now Board of Assessment Appeals, Sec. 21, Rep. Act No . 1125) of the City of Bacolod which sustained the decision of the City Assessor holding that the properties used in the telephone system of petitioner in Bacolod are 306

CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION - C. T. A. SE NO . 300 - 2- subject to the real proper ty tax . The deci sion of the City As sessor (whos e duties are performed by the City Treasurer under Sec . 27 (e), Com. Act No . 326) is contained in his letter of Septem- ber 9, 1952 "requiring t he petitioner to f ile for assessment and real estate tax purposes a d eclar a- tion based on the book value of petitioner's telephone wires, poles and other apparatus which are u sed in t h e operation of its telephone system in the said city. " (Par . 3, Petition for Revi ew. ) It was thi s decision of the City Assessor ( City Treasurer ) that was elevated to the Board of Assessment Appeals of Bacolod Ci ty and which was su s tained by said Board . (Exhs . L & M-1 . ) There- fore, i n appealing to this Court fnom the decision of the Board, petitioner may raise only the issue of the legality of "r equiring the petitioner to file for assessment and real estate tax purposes a decla ration ba sed on the book value of peti- tioner's telephone system in the said city." This Court has no jurisdiction to consider on appeal any issue involved in any oatter not raised before and passed upon by sud Board . Even gr anting that the question of be legal- ity of the col lection from petitioner of the r eal property tax in ques t ion was raised in the ap- peal f i led with said Board, it is believed that the Board has no power to pass upon that ques- tion . Neither t he cha rter of Bacolo~nor ~e 307

- -~----~ , CO CUIUUNG AND . DJ S ~N I U~ OPIJION - C. T. A. CASE NO . 300 - 3- ssesament Law ( om� ., ct o. l+7 ) empowrors the Board to pass upon the 1 gality of the collect- ion or real property tax a by the Ci ty Tr easure r . The sole remedy of t he taxpayer in such case is to i nstitute an action for r covery in the pro- per Court of First Instance after cooplying with the requi sites provided by law. Another weighty consideration which ' st ot be overlooked is t he fact that tho City Treasurer of acolod, to his capac!tz a s sucb Ci t Y Treasurgt, has not been m de a p~rty to this case. He could not have been ade part y to this case because his deci sions or actions a s such City nreasurer, which are to b distinguished from his decisions or acti ons as Cit y s sessor, nrc not reviewable by the Bo rd of J~ sessment ppcals . It ould be unfair to the City of Bacolod , r epresented by the City re surer, for it to be required to ro- tund the tax in question without benefit of hear- ing . Tho City Tr ea surer y have daf nses against the claim of herein petitioner, defenses which are not available to respondent Board of Assess- ment Appeals of Bacol od . Under the circumstances , I reel that the order dir ecting th said City Treasurer to refund to p titioner the amount in question violat s the cons t itutional guaran~ee against depriving a person of his property with- out du process of law. qo .)