You are on page 1of 1

(case no.

294)

TOLENTINO v. SECRETARY OF FINANCE


GR Numbers 115455
October 30, 1995
Art. III
FACTS:
The case is a resolution of a motion of reconsideration filed by the petitioners in line with
the decision rendered by the Court En Banc on August 25, 1994 dismissing the original petition.
Petitioners assail the constitutionality of Republic Act 7716 otherwise known as the Expanded
Value-Added Tax Law. They assert that it is violative of the equal protection clause of the
constitution among other contentions. In the first decision rendered by the Supreme Court, it held
that there have been no notices of assessments issued to petitioners and no determinations at the
administrative levels of their claims so as to illuminate the actual operation of the law and enable
the Court to reach sound judgment regarding the fundamental questions raised in the petition.
There is a lack of empirical data on which the conclusion that it will hit the poor and middleincome group in the society on which they could base the conclusion regarding the arguments.
ISSUE:
Whether RA 7719 is violative of the equal protection clause.
HELD:
No. Equality and uniformity of taxation means that all taxable articles or kinds of
property of the same class be taxed at the same rate. To satisfy this, it is enough that the statute
or ordinance applies equally to all persons, forms, and corporations placed in similar
situation. There is no fully developed record which can show the actual impact of the E-VAT.
Petitioners have no factual foundation to show the concrete application of the law and the actual
impact on property rights. There is a need for proof of such persuasive character that would
lead the Court to believe that such law is void on its face, absent such a showing, the
presumption of constitutionality must prevail.

Prepared by: Cecille Diane DJ. Mangaser