ACTING COMMISSION OF

CUSTOMS V. MANILA
ELECTRIC COMPANY
G.R. NO. L-23623 - JUNE 30, 1977
FACTS
This is a petition for review of the reversal by the respondent Court of a determination by
petitioner Norberto Romualdez Jr., that private respondent was not exempt from the
payment of special import tax under RA 1394 for shipment to it of insulating oil.

In respondent Court’s decision, private respondent is not exempt from the special import tax
not only by virtue of Sec. 6 of RA 1394, which exempts from said tax equipment and spare
parts for use in industries, but also under Par. 9, Part Two, of its franchise, which expressly
exempts is insulators from all taxes of whatever kind and nature.

The question to such decision of the respondent Court is: “Does the insulating oil in question
come within the meaning of the term ‘insulator ‘?”. Yes the insulating oil imported by
petitioner used for cooling as well as for insulating comes within the term insulator.
LAW
REPUBLIC ACT 1394

AN ACT TO IMPOSE A SPECIAL IMPORT TAX ON ALL GOODS, ARTICLES OR

PRODUCTS IMPORTED OR BROUGHT INTO THE PHILIPPINES, AND TO REPEAL
REPUBLIC ACTS NUMBERED SIX HUNDRED AND ONE, EIGHT HUNDRED AND
FOURTEEN, EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-ONE, ELEVEN HUNDRED AND
SEVENTY-FIVE, ELEVEN HUNDRED AND NINETY-SEVEN AND THIRTEEN HUNDRED
AND SEVENTY-FIVE.
QUESTIONS ON THE LAW:
Whether or not the respondent is liable for the payment of the special import tax
under RA 1394.
HOW DID SUPREME COURT RULED:
No, respondent is not liable for the payment of the special import tax under RA 1394.

As noted at the outset, the decision speaks for itself. It cannot be stigmatized as suffering
from any flaw that would call for its reversal.

‘only errors of law, and not rulings on the weight of evidence, are reviewable by this Court.’
The facts then as above ascertained cannot be disturbed. In our latest decision, there is a
categorical assertion that where the question is one of fact, it is no longer reviewable.

ITCAB, that is what the respondent did, it is clear according to Sec. 6 of RA 1394 and Par. 9,
Part Two, of its franchise, that insulators are exempt from all taxes whatever kind of nature
and that insulating oil comes within the term insulator therefore respondent is not liable for
the payment of the special import tax under RA 1394. The petition for review is dismissed.
RULES OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION:
WHEN THE LANGUAGE OF STATUTE IS CLEAR IT MUST
BE GIVEN ITS NATURAL MEANING

As a rule, any claim for exemption from a tax statute is strictly construed against the
taxpayer. However, where the law is clear and unambiguous, the law must be taken as it is,
devoid of judicial addition or subtraction.—It is true that in the construction of tax statutes tax
exemptions favored in the law, and are construed strictissimi juris against the taxpayer,
However, it is equally a recognized principle that where the provision of the law is clear and
unambiguous, so that there is no occasion for the court’s seeking the legislative intent, the
law must be taken as it is, devoid of judicial addition or subtraction.