PERMISSIBLE

Bohol
DELEGATION and Mateo

RULE-MAKING
POWER II
 G.R. NO. 108358
JANUARY 20, 1995

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE
VS.
THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS,
R.O.H. AUTO PRODUCTS
PHILIPPINES, INC. AND THE HON.
COURT OF TAX APPEALS
 Assessed the company’s deficiency income and
business taxes for fiscal years ended
August 13, 1986 September 30, 1981 and September 30, 1982
in an aggregate amount of P1,410,157.71.

Commissioner of the ROH Auto Products

Internal Revenue Philippines Inc.
 President Then yielded
Aquino legislative
power.

Executive Order 41

A one-time tax amnesty on

unpaid income taxes, which
was later amended to include
estate and donor’s taxes and
August 22, 1986 taxes on business, for the
taxable years 1981 to 1985.
October 1986 and
November 1986
Paid taxes due.
ROH availed of the
amnesty and filed
its Tax Amnesty
Return and
Supplemental Tax
Amnesty Return,
respectively.

the amnesty coverage to include only
Since the company was able
to avail itself of the tax
amnesty, the deficiency tax
notice should forthwith be
cancelled and withdrawn.
ROH
Revenue Memorandum Order
implementing EO 41 had construed
assessments issued by the BIR after
the promulgation of the executive
order and not to assessments
theretofore made.
Commissioner
Whether or not the Commissioner
has the power to deny the
company’s claim to the benefits of
the amnesty law?
 The added
exception urged
by the
Commissioner
based on
NO. Revenue
Memorandum
Order

Further Administrative
restricting Legislation
the scope
of the
amnesty
Contrary to the
mandate of the
law which the
regulation ought
to implement
Supreme Court
Minister of
Finance

Commissioner
of Internal
Revenue
 Forbidden

The Commissioner’s An act of

additional exception administrative
against the company. legislation

Sec. 4. Exceptions . — The following taxpayers may not avail themselves of the amnesty herein granted:
a) Those falling under the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 1, 2 and 14; b) Those with income tax cases already filed in Court as of
the effectivity hereof;

c) Those with criminal cases involving violations of the income tax already filed in
court as of the effectivity filed in court as of the effectivity hereof;

d) Those that have withholding tax liabilities under the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended, insofar as the said liabilities are
concerned; e) Those with tax cases pending investigation by the Bureau of Internal Revenue as of the effectivity hereof as a result of
information furnished under Section 316 of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended; f) Those with pending cases involving
unexplained or unlawfully acquired wealth before the Sandiganbayan; g) Those liable under Title Seven, Chapter Three (Frauds, Illegal
Exactions and Transactions) and Chapter Four (Malversation of Public Funds and Property) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
 G.R. NO. 118712
OCTOBER 6, 1995

LAND BANK OF THE

PHILIPPINES
VS.
COURT OF APPEALS,
PEDRO L. YAP, HEIRS
OFEMILIANO F. SANTIAGO,
AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT
& DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION
 “Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law
(RA 6657)” Landowners

Acquired landholdings
as subjects of transfer
schemes to qualified Pedro L. Yap, the Heirs of
beneficiaries Ofemiliano Santiago, and
the Agricultural
DAR Management and
Development Corporation
 Deposit money in
trust of the land
owners
Landowners were
aggrieved

Filed a
complaint
They alleged that DAR AO No. 6 before the SC
Series 1990 is invalid because it
is in contravention with the Landbank
governing statute, RA 6657

Instead of depositing cash or

bonds as payment for the land DAR
AO is a valid exercise of its rule-
making power pursuant to
Section 49 of RA 6657. The
issuance of the “Certificate of
Deposit” by Land Bank was a
substantial compliance with
Section 16(e).
Land Bank
DAR
The issuance of the CDs
was in consonance with
Circulars 29, 29-A and 54
of the Land Registration
Authority where the words
“reserved/deposited” were
also used.
Whether or not the AO issued by DAR
stating that payment be deposited in
trust instead of depositing cash or
bond valid?
 Administrative construction is not absolute, it may The purpose of quasi-
be set aside by judiciary if there is an error of law, a legislative power is to
grave abuse of power or lack of jurisdiction or grave carry provisions of law
abuse of discretion clearly conflicting with either the into effect
letter or the spirit of a legislative enactment
In case there
No. Confined to is a
implementing the discrepancy
law or putting it into between the
effect basic law and
an
Power of implementing
Administrative rule or
Agencies regulation, it
is the former
that prevails

Supreme Court
 RA 6657

Section 16(e). Procedure for Acquiring Private Lands - Upon receipt by the
landowner of the corresponding payment or, in case of rejection or no
response from the landowner, upon the deposit with an accessible bank
designated by the DAR of the compensation in cash or in LBP bonds in
accordance with this Act, the DAR shall take immediate possession of the
land and shall request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer
Certificate of Title (TCT) in the name of the Republic of the Philippines . . .”
 If there was intention to
Very include a “trust account”
explicit among the valid modes
of deposit..

Expressed
or..
Deposit

Qualifying
Not in trust. words ought to
have appeared

Cash
 G.R. NO. 126496
APRIL 30, 1997

GMCR, INC.; SMART COMM., INC.;

INTERNATIONAL COMM. CORP.; ISLA
COMM. CO., INC.
VS.
BELL TELECOMM. PHIL., INC.; THE
NATIONAL TELECOMM.
COMMISSION AND HON. SIMEON L.
KINTANAR IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF
THE NATIONAL TELECOMM.
 “Application for a Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity to Pprocure to
install, operate and maintain a Nationwide
Integrated Telecommunications Services
and to Charge Rates, and with further
request for the issuance of Provisional
Authority”
Bell Telecommunication
Philippines, Inc.

NLRC
 Unenfranchised Excluded in the
applicant deliberations for
service area
assignments for
BellTell local exchange
Among carrier service.
others

RA 7692
International
Smart
Comm.
Comm., Inc.
Corporation
BellTel was granted a
congressional franchise to
Isla Comm., carry on the business of
Co., Inc. GMCR, Inc.
providing
telecommunications
services in and around the
country.
 Respondent NTC Deputy
Common Carriers
filed with NTC Commissioners Fidelo
Authorization
a second Dumlao and
Department
application. Consuelo Perez

Study and
recommendation Signified their approval

Memorandum
showing approval

Did not
Draft
sign
Commissioner
Simeon Kintanar
 “NTC Circular No. 1-1-93,
Memorandum Circular
No. 3-1-93, and Order”

Declared the NTC as a

single entity or non-
collegial entity
Disapproved

BellTel’s
Commissioner request
Kintanar
 Whether or not NTC Circular No. 1-1-
93, Memorandum Circular No. 3-1-93,
and the Order of Kintanar declaring
the NTC as a single entity or non-
collegial entity is valid?
 Null and void

No.
Contrary
to law

NTC Circular
No. 1-1-93

Memorandum
Circular No. 3-1-93
Supreme Court
Order of Kintanar
 Administrative Attempts to validate the one-man rule in the NTC
regulations as executed by persons with the selfish interest of
maintaining their illusory hold of power.

Institutionalization of the
one-man rule in the NTC
Derive
validity
EO 146 Assailed laws

Statute
Organized NTC as a three-man commission,
the three members of the commission each
has one vote to cast in every deliberation
Intended to implement
concerning a case or any incident therein that
is subject to the jurisdiction of the NTC.
 Absent the
The vote alone required
of the concurring
chairman of vote coming
the from the rest
commission of the
Commissioner Kintanar membership
of the
Does not speak commission
for and in behalf to at least
of the NTC arrive at a
majority
Not sufficient to legally render an NTC order, decision
resolution or decision
 G.R. NO. 110526
FEBRUARY 10, 1998

ASSOCIATION OF
PHILIPPINE COCONUT
DESICCATORS
VS.
PHILIPPINE COCONUT
AUTHORITY
 PD 232

“An independent public

corporation to promote the
rapid integrated
development and growth of Philippine Coconut Authority
the coconut and other palm
oil industry and to ensure
that coconut farmers
become direct participants In charge of the
in such development issuing of licenses to
through a regulatory would-be coconut
scheme set up by law” plant operators
 The registration
Board Resolution No. 018- would be limited to
93 the "monitoring" of
their volumes of
No longer require those production and
PCA wishing to engage in administration of
coconut processing to quality standards.
apply for licenses as a
condition for engaging in
such business.
To promote free
But this caused cut-throat competition, enterprise unhampered
underselling, smuggling, and the decline of by protective regulations
coconut-based commodities. and unnecessary
bureaucratic red tapes.
 To those wishing to operate
“Certificates of desiccated coconut processing
Registration” plants.

Not to approve
PCA the resolution! Association of
Philippine Coconut
Desiccators
No reply

Office of the President

 Whether or not the PCA’s board
resolution which no longer requires
those wishing to engage in coconut
processing to apply to it for a license
or permit valid?
 No. Abdicates its role
provided by law

By limiting the
scope of
Supreme Court registration to
merely monitoring
volumes of
Charged with the duty of production
carrying out the State’s
PCA policy to promote the rapid
integrated development of
the coconut industry.
 Would simply be Give the market
compiling statistical data forces control on
but if violations are how the coconut
made, there would not industry will
be anything it could do
PCA develop.

Beyond the power of an

administrative agency to “Free enterprise does
dismantle it. not call for removal of
protective regulations”

Any change in policy must be

made by the legislative
department of the government.
 G.R. NO. 127685
JULY 23, 1998

BLAS F. OPLE
VS.
RUBEN D. TORRES,
A. AGUIRRE, H. VILLANUEVA,
C. HABITO, R. BARBERS, C. REODICA ,
C. SARINO, R. VALENCIA, T. P. AFRICA,
HEAD OF THE NATIONAL COMPUTER
CENTER AND CHAIRMAN
OF THE COMMISSION
ON AUDIT
 Administrative
Order No. 308

"Adoption of a
National
Computerized
Identification
Reference System." Under it, a citizen cannot
transact business with
government agencies
delivering basic services
to the people without the
contemplated
Pres. Fidel V. Ramos identification card.
 In charge with the
implementation of AO 308
Senator

Taxpayer Members of the

Blas Ople
Inter-Agency
Coordinating
Committee
Member
Petitioned of GSIS
to assail AO
Executive Secretary Ruben
Torres and the heads of the
government agencies
 Whether or not the President can
issue an Administrative Order for the
adoption of a National Computerized
Identification Reference System,
independent of a legislative act?
 All-encompassing
in scope

Affects the life and

Establishes a
No. liberty of every Filipino
system of
citizen and foreign
identification
resident

AO 308 Violates their

right to privacy

Supreme Court
 Redefines the As well as the line that separates
parameters of some the administrative power of the
basic rights of our President to make rules and the Law
citizenry vis-a-vis the legislative power of Congress
State.

Requires a delicate
Primacy of Choice of
adjustment of
national policies
various contending
security
state policies

Extent of privacy interest against dossier-gathering by government

 No citizen will refuse to get
this identification card for Without the
no one can avoid dealing ID
with government.
Law
Confers no right

Imposes no duty

AO 308
Affords no protection

Creates no office

A citizen will have difficulty exercising

his rights and enjoying his privileges.
 G.R. NO. 112024
JANUARY 28, 1999

PHILIPPINE BANK OF
COMMUNICATIONS
VS.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE, COURT OF TAX APPEALS
AND COURT OF APPEALS
 Filed Annual
Income Tax Reported a
Returns for the net loss
year-ended 1986

Paid its
quarterly
income tax No taxable
for the first income
Philippine Bank
and second
of Commerce
quarters of
1985

Earned rental Corresponding tax thereof

income for both was withheld and remitted
1985 and 1986 by the lessees to the BIR.
On 1987 or after more than
two years from payment of
taxes
Pending
investigation in
PBCom filed for the BIR
a refund

Filed a petition
for review with
the Court of Tax
Appeals
 Denied
“National Internal
Revenue Code”

Application for
refund must be
made within two
CTA years from the
payment of tax.

“RMC 7-85”
Acting
Changed the prescriptive period
Commissioner
of two years to ten years on PBCom
of Internal
claims of excess quarterly
Revenue
income tax payments
Whether or not the changing of the
prescriptive period by the Acting
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
is an exercise of legislative power
and is thus invalid?
 Merely interpretations
Yes.

Administrative
Issuances

Not
Administrative
Supreme Court expansions
agencies
of the
provisions
of law

No administrative power
 Acting
“National Internal Revenue Code of 1977” Commissioner
of Internal
Section 230. The taxpayer may file a claim Revenue
for refund or credit with the Commissioner
of Internal Revenue, within two (2) years
after payment of tax, before any suit in CTA
is commenced. The two-year prescriptive Change prescriptive period
period provided, should be computed from from two years to ten years.
the time of filing the Adjustment Return
and final payment of the tax for the year.
Inconsistency

Legislated guidelines contrary to

the statute passed by Congress.
 G.R. NO. 131787
MAY 19, 1999

CHINA BANKING CORPORATION

AND CBC PROPERTIES AND
COMPUTER CENTER INC.
VS.
THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES, HOME DEVELOPENT
MUTUAL FUND (HDMF); HDMF
PRESIDENT; AND THE HOME
MUTUAL DEVELOPMENT FUND
 PD 1752,as amended by
RA 7742

Section 19. Employers who have

their own existing provident and/or
employees-housing plan may
China Banking Corporation register for annual certification for
waiver or suspension from coverage
or participation in the Home
CBC Properties and Development Mutual Fund…”
Computer Center, Inc.

Superior
Certificates of Waiver retirement plan
 CBC and
“Amendment to the CBC-
Rules and Regulations PCCI
Implementing
HDMF Board RA 7742 and Revised
Guidelines “
A petition to declare void the
Amendment and Guidelines
A company must have a
provident/retirement
AND housing plan
superior to that provided
by the Pag-IBIG Fund to Issued in excess of
be entitled to the jurisdiction and with
Exceeded
exemption or waiver. grave abuse of
its rule-
making discretion
power amounting to lack of
jurisdiction
Whether or not the Amendment
Guidelines issued by the HDMF
Board were in excess of its rule-
making power?
Yes.
Amendment and
Guidelines

Supreme Court

Null and void

 The enabling law conditions
exception upon the existence
of a provident retirement fund
and/or housing plan, not
both.

CBC and CBC-PCCI

The use of “and/or” can only be used

interchangeably not together and that the option of
making it either both (applying “and”) or any one
(applying “or”) belongs to the board of trustees.

HDMF Board
 Delegated power to
Rules and create new or additional
regulations legal provisions

Have the power and effect of law

Should be within the scope of the authority granted by the

legislature to the administrative agency
Authority granted by
the legislature Provident retirement
fund AND housing plan

Provident
Exceptions retirement fund

Provident housing
plan

CBC and Correct

CBC-PCCI
THE END