Case Digest - Taxation

G.R 152904 June 28, 2007
Velasco, Jr. J.:
Benevola de Cebu is a non-stock non-profit organization which in 1990, a medical arts building was constructed and in 1998 was issued with a certification classifying the building as commercial. City assessor of Cebu assessed the building with a market value of Php 28,060,520 and on assessed value of Php 9,821,180 at the assessment level of 35% and not 10% which is currently imposed on private respondent herein. Petitioner claimed that the building is used as commercial clinic/spaces for renting out to physicians and thus classified as commercial. Benevola de Cebu contended that the building is used actually, directly and exclusively part of hospital and should have an assessment level of 10%

Whether or not the new building is liable to pay the 35% assessment level?
We hold that the new building is an integral part of the hospital and should not be assessed as commercial. Being a tertiary hospital, it is mandated to fully departmentalized and be equipped with the service capabilities needed to support certified medical specialist and other licensed physicians. The fact that they are holding office is a separate building does not take away the essence and nature of their services vis-a-vis the overall operation of the hospital and to its patients.
Under the Local Government Code, Sec. 26: All lands, buildings and other improvements thereon actually, directly and exclusively used for hospitals, cultural or scientific purposes and those owned and used by local water districts… shall be classified as special.

Associaiton of Customs Brokers vs Manila
GRN L-4376 May 22, 1953
En Banc
The Municipal Board of Manila passed ordinance No. 3379 which imposes a property tax that is within the power of the City under its revised charter. The ordinance was passed by the Municipal Board under the authority conferred by section 18 of RA 409

Whether or not the ordinance infringes on the uniformity of taxes as ordained by the Constitution.
The Ordinance exacts the tax upon all motor vehicles operating within Manila and does not distinguish between a motor vehicle registered in the City and one registered in another place nor does it distinguish private of vehicle for hire. The distinction is important if we note that the ordinance intends to burden with the tax only those registered in Manila. There is no pretense that the Ordinance equally applies to vehicles who come to Manila for a temporary purpose.

No comments: