Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Constitutional Limitations: Tan v. Del Rosario, Supra

    Uploaded by

    Meg Bobadilla
    4 views1 page
    The document discusses the equal protection clause of the constitution. It summarizes a case, Tan v. Del Rosario, that established that a law is not arbitrary if it applies equally to all things of the same class, and does not violate equal protection if there are substantial differences between classes. The court ruled that an amendatory tax law that classified taxpayers into four groups did not violate equal protection because it was attached to an existing law that already established classifications.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    6.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses the equal protection clause of the constitution. It summarizes a case, Tan v. Del Rosario, that established that a law is not arbitrary if it applies equally to all things of the same class, and does not violate equal protection if there are substantial differences between classes. The court ruled that an amendatory tax law that classified taxpayers into four groups did not violate equal protection because it was attached to an existing law that already established classifications.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views1 page

    Constitutional Limitations: Tan v. Del Rosario, Supra

    Uploaded by

    Meg Bobadilla
    The document discusses the equal protection clause of the constitution. It summarizes a case, Tan v. Del Rosario, that established that a law is not arbitrary if it applies equally to all things of the same class, and does not violate equal protection if there are substantial differences between classes. The court ruled that an amendatory tax law that classified taxpayers into four groups did not violate equal protection because it was attached to an existing law that already established classifications.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS

    2. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS

    Tan v. Del Rosario, supra.

     The said law is not arbitrary; it is germane to the purpose of the law and; applies to all things
    of equal conditions and of same class.

     It is neither violative of equal protection clause due to the existence of substantial difference
    between one who practice his profession alone and one who is engaged to proprietorship.

     Further, the SC said that RA 7496 is just an amendatory provision of the code of taxpayers
    where it classifies taxpayers in to four main groups: Individuals, Corporations, Estate under
    Judicial Settlement and Irrevocable Trust. The court would have appreciated the contention
    of the petitioner if RA 7496 was an independent law. But since it is attached to a law that has
    already classified taxpayers, there is no violation of equal protection clause.

    You might also like