Commissioner of Internal Revenue v Manila Bankers DigestFull description
9. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Covanta Energy Philippine Holdings, Inc. digestFull description
PHILIPPINE BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS vs COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE G.R. No. 194065, June 20, 2016 SERENO, C.J.: FACTS: Petitioner Philippine Bank of Communications (PBCom) purchased d…Full description
s
tax case regarding tax exemptionFull description
I do not own the "digest"Full description
Purehold
Admin Law Case
analysis of internal controlFull description
Digest
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. St. Lukes Medical Center IncFull description
Form and promulgation of judgmentFull description
Steelcase, Inc. v. Design International Selections, Inc.Full description
digest
notesFull description
Case digestFull description
Case Digest
sample digestFull description
.Full description
John Brancas attempt to force us into giving up our Domain name > www.TeamMichaelJackson.com DENIED!!! But the harassment has not ceased for FIVE YEARS...Full description
## 65 Comm Commis issi sion oner er of Inte Intern rnal al Reve Revenu nue e v. $%!R: $%!R: Janet Puregold Duty Free, Inc. Notes: G.R. No 202789 Effect of Declaration of !PIC: !PIC: Unconstitutionality P!N"N": P!N"N": Velasco, Jr., J C&" '() D!CRIN": D!CRIN" : Doctrine of Operative Fact
-which reconi!es that a "#$icial $eclaration of invali$it% &a% not necessaril% o'literate all the effects an$ conse(#ences of a voi$ act prior to s#ch $eclaration. "mergency Recit*
)#reol$ is enae$ in the sale of vario#s cons#&er oo$s e*cl#sivel% within the +lar pecial cono&ic /one +/1. certificates were iss#e$ p#rs#ant to ec. of *ec#tive Or$er No. O1 80, e*ten$in to '#siness enterprises operatin within the +/ all the incentives rante$ to enterprises within the #'ic pecial cono&ic /one /1 #n$er 34 7227, otherwise nown as the 56ases +onversion an$ Develop&ent 4ct of 992. h#s, )#reol$ onl% pai$ the preferential ta* of . owever, in a latter r#lin +ocon#t Oil case1, the + ann#lle$ the ta* incentives of ec. O 80. hereafter, +onress enacte$ 34 9;99 to rant ta* a&nest% to those affecte$ '% the + r#lin. )#reol$ co&plie$ with the re(#ire&ents of the ta* a&nest% '#t the 6<3 still i&pose$ ta*es. he +4 r#le$ in favor of )#reol$. he + also r#le$ in favor of )#reol$. FC&*
)#reol$ is enae$ in the sale of vario#s cons#&er oo$s e*cl#sivel% within the +lar pecial cono&ic /one +/1. +ertificates +ertificates were iss#e$ p#rs#ant to ec. of *ec#tive Or$er No. O1 80, e*ten$in o to '#sin '#sines ess s enterp enterpris rises es opera operatin tin withi within n the the +/ +/ all all the incen incentiv tives es rant rante$ e$ to enterprises within the #'ic pecial cono&ic /one /1 #n$er 34 7227, otherwise nown as the 56ases +onversion an$ Develop&ent 4ct of 992.5 Nota' Nota'l% l%,, ec. ec. 2 of 34 7227 7227 prov provi$ i$es es $#t%$#t%-fre free e i&port i&portat ation ions s an$ an$ e*e&p e*e&ptio tions ns of '#sinesses within the / fro& local an$ national ta*es. . On J#l% 2, 200, in +ocon#t Oil 3efiners v. orres, however, this +o#rt ann#lle$ the a$verte$ ec. of O 80, in effect with$rawin the preferential ta* treat&ent heretofore en"o%e$ '% all '#sinesses locate$ in the +/. On Nove&'er 7, 200, then Dep#t% +o&&issioner for pecial +once&s?O<+-@are a*pa%ers ervice of the 6#rea# of 200>..
6<3 still i&pose$ s#ch ta*es. +4: hel$ that )#reol$ is entitle$ to ta* a&nest%
I&&$"+&: hether or not the + 3#lin in the +ocon#t oil case can 'e retroactivel% applie$ to o'literate the effect of ec O 80 RI!: No.
his +o#rt is $#t%-'o#n$ to protect the 'asic e*pectations taen into acco#nt '% '#sinesses #n$er relevant laws, s#ch as 34 9;99. For this reason, this +o#rt s#'scri'es to the $octrine of operative fact, which reconi!es that a "#$icial $eclaration of invali$it% &a% not necessaril% o'literate all the effects an$ conse(#ences of a voi$ act prior to s#ch $eclaration
