JOURNAL

Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance

Facts: Petitioners claimed that R.A. 7716 (Expanded Value-Added Tax
Law{VAT}), a revenue bill. They admitted that House Bill No. 11197 was filed in
the House of Representative, passed through 3 readings and it was sent to the
Senate then referred to Senate Way and Means Committee. They complained
also that this bill did not go through the 2nd and 3rd readings. The Senate passed
its own version numbered as S. No. 1630 which was approved on May 24,
1994. It was said that the Senate should have amend the H.B. No. 11197 by
taking out the text of the bill and substitute the S.NO. No. 1630 so that the bill
remains a house bill and the Senate version just becomes the text only of the
house bill.

Issue: Whether or not the enactment of S.No. 1630 is not an amendment to a

House bill revenue bill.
Ruling: No. The Senate has already passed its own version of revenue bills
which became the enrolled bills. The Senate is allowed to propose or concur
with amendments to the bills. It is accepted that the Senate may introduce
amendments by substitution which may entirely replace the bill. There is no
rule that prescribes that the amendments of bills prescribing its number and
other parts up to the enacting clause must be preserved at all times, the
amendments may be incorporated in place of the original body of the bill. It is
enough that it was passed on the 1st reading and referred to a committee. In
one case, Speaker Jose P. Laurel, Jr. Said that if the H.B. had been approved
by the Senate, there would been no need to a conference but if the Senate
passed another bill on the same subject matter, the conference committee had
to be created and consider the committee report.
There was also an urgent need for consideration of S. No. 1630 because it
respond to the call of the President by voting on the bill 2nd and 3rd readings on
the same day. The court was satisfied that it was discussed for 6 days. On
March 24, 1994, only its distribution in advance in its final printed form was
actually dispensed with by holding the voting on 2 nd and 3rd readings. The
Conference Committee submitted also a report showing the changes made on
the differing versions of the both houses. The record showed that it was upheld
by viva voce and sustained by a vote of 48 to 5. the Conference Committee is
not limited to resolving differences which means it may propose an entirely new
provision. It is important also is that it was approved by both houses.