PABLO LORENZO, as trustee of the estate of
Thomas Hanley v. JUAN POSADAS, JR., Collector
of Internal Revenue. G.R. No. L-43082. June 18,
1937
FACTS:
Thomas Hanley died, leaving a will and considerable
amount of real and personal properties. The will
bequeathed Matthew Hanley, Thomas' nephew, the
money and the real estate. Also stipulated was that
the property will only be given ten years after
Thomas' death.
The CFI appointed PJM Moore as considered trustee
to administer the real properties. Moore acted as
trustee until he resigned and Pablo Lorenzo was
appointed in his stead.
Juan Posadas, the CIR, assessed inheritance tax
against the estate amounting to P2,057.74. Lorenzo
paid the tax after he was ordered by the CFI due to
the CIR's motion. Lorenzo claimed that the
inheritance tax should have been assessed after 10
years and asked for a refund.
The CIR denied the protest and reassessed Lorenzo of
P1,191.27 which represents interest due on the tax
and which was not included in the original
assessment. However, the CFI dismissed this
counterclaim and also denied Lorenzo’s claim for
refund against the CIR, thus the case.
ISSUES :Whether the estate was delinquent in paying
the inheritance.
Whether the inheritance tax be computed
from its value ten years later.
FACTS:
In a Codicil appended to the Last Will and
Testament of testatrix Aleja Belleza, Dr. Jorge
Rabadilla, predecessor-in-interest of the herein
petitioner, Johnny S. Rabadilla, was instituted as a
devisee of parcel of land. The Codicil provides that
Jorge Rabadilla shall have the obligation until he
dies, every year to give Maria Marlina Coscolluela y
Whether the compensation of the trustees
should be part of the estate subject to tax.
RULING:
YES. The delinquency in payment occurred when
Moore became trustee. The interest due should be
computed from that date and it is error of Lorenzo to
compute it one month later. A surcharge 25 per
centum should be added to the tax and interest due
and unpaid within ten days after the date of notice.
The CIR communicated with Moore and a date was
fixed. As the tax and interest due were not paid on
that date, the estate became liable for the payment of
the surcharge.
NO. The Court held that a transmission by
inheritance is taxable at the time of the predecessor's
death, notwithstanding the postponement of the
actual possession or enjoyment of the estate by the
beneficiary, and the tax measured by the value of the
property transmitted at that time regardless of its
appreciation or depreciation.
NO. A trustee, no doubt, is entitled to receive a fair
compensation for his services . But from this it does
not follow that the compensation due him may
lawfully be deducted in arriving at the net value of
the estate subject to tax
RABADILLA vs. CA
June 29, 2000
Belleza, (75) (sic) piculs of Export sugar and (25)
piculs of Domestic sugar, until the said Maria
Marlina Coscolluela y Belleza dies.
Dr. Jorge Rabadilla died. Private respondent
brought a complaint, to enforce the provisions of
subject Codicil.
ISSUE:
 WON the obligations of Jorge Rabadilla subject Codicil were transmitted to his forced heirs,
under the Codicil are inherited by his heirs. at the time of his death. And since obligations not
extinguished by death also form part of the estate
HELD:
of the decedent; corollarily, the obligations imposed
by the Codicil on the deceased Dr. Jorge Rabadilla,
Under Article 776 of the NCC, inheritance
were likewise transmitted to his compulsory heirs
includes all the property, rights and obligations of a
upon his death.
person, not extinguished by his death. Conformably,
whatever rights Dr. Jorge Rabadilla had by virtue of