Casco Phil. Commercial Co. v.

Gimenez
GR L-17931 , February 28, 2963
MALONES, E.:

Point of the Case:

The point of the case is legislative acts must be construed according to the language of the law in
a verbative manner.

Facts of the Case:

This is a petition for review of a decision of the Auditor General denying a claim for refund of petitioner
Casco Philippine Chemical Co., Inc. Pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 2609, otherwise known
as the Foreign Exchange Margin Fee Law, the Central Bank of the Philippines its Circular No. 95. the Bank
later promulgated a memorandum establishing the procedure for applications for exemption from the
payment of said fee. The margin established by the Monetary Board pursuant to the provision of section
one hereof shall not be imposed upon the sale of foreign exchange for the importation of the following: Urea
formaldehyde for the manufacture of plywood and hardboard when imported by and for the exclusive use
of end-users. Petitioner maintains that the term "urea formaldehyde" appearing in this provision should be
construed as "urea andformaldehyde" (emphasis supplied) and that respondents herein, the Auditor
General and the Auditor of the Central Bank, have erred in holding otherwise.

Issue/s:

1. Whether or not the urea and formaldehyde are exempt from the payment of Margin fee.

Ruling:

No, the court held that the provision clearly states "urea formaldehyde" which is a finished product
according to National Institute of Science and Technology and patently distinct and different from urea"
and "formaldehyde" so the petition cannot be granted. If there has been any mistake in the law the remedy
is amendment or curative legislation, not by judicial decree.