045. Tolentino v CIR , G.R. No.

115455 October 30, 1995

FACTS: Motions seeking reconsideration of our decision dismissing the petitions filed in these
cases for the declaration of unconstitutionality of R.A. No. 7716, otherwise known as the
Expanded Va lue-Added Tax Law. They reiterate previous claims made by them that R.A. No.
7716 did not "originate exclusively" in the House of Representatives as required by Art. VI, sec.
24 of the Constitution. They complain that the Senate did not pass it on second and third
readings. Instead what the Senate did was to pass its own version (S. No. 1630) which it
approved on May 24, 1994.

ISSUE: Whether RA 7716 is constitutional

RULING: Yes. The enactment of S. No. 1630 is not the only instance in which the Senate
proposed an amendment to a House revenue bill by enacting its own version of a revenue bill.
because revenue bills are required to originate exclusively in the House of Representatives, the
Senate cannot enact revenue measures of its own without such bills. After a revenue bill is
passed and sent over to it by the House, however, the Senate certainly can pass its own version
on the same subject matter. This follows from the coequality of the two chambers of Congress.
In sum, while Art. VI, §24 provides that all appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing
increase of the public debt, bills of local application, and private bills must "originate exclusively
in the House of Representatives," it also adds, "but the Senate may propose or concur with
amendments." In the exercise of this power, the Senate may propose an entirely new bill as a
substitute measure.