Roxas, Rafael

CLWTAXN K31

Case Digest

Ferdinand Marcos Jr., v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 120880, 05 June 1997).

Facts

In September 1989, Marcos passed away. In order to investigate and examine former
president Marcos' tax liabilities, a special tax audit team was established in June 1990.
Following their inquiry, they published a report in 1991 noting that the Marcoses had violated the
National Internal Revenue Code by failing to file a number of tax returns from 1982 to 1986 and
a written notice of death. Imelda Marcos was the subject of criminal accusations, and the
Commission prepared the Marcoses' income tax return on Internal Revenue (CIR). Afterward,
the BIR issued a number of shortfall tax assessments. The CIR asserted that these were given
to the Marcoses personally and constructively, but the deficiency tax assessments were not
protested administratively within the 30 days following receipt of assessments.

The Marcoses' real estate was the subject of many notices of levy from February to May
1993, according to the BIR. The oldest son of former President Marcos, Ferdinand Marcos II,
filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition along with an application for a writ of preliminary
injunction, questioning the actions of the Commission on Internal Revenue in assessing and
collecting estate and income tax delinquencies upon the estate and properties of the former
President Marcos through the summary remedy of Levy on Real Properties despite the ongoing
probate proceedings on the former's will. He asked for the (1) cancellation and revocation of
notices on the levy of real property and (2) a prohibition against the Head Revenue Executive
Assistant conducting the auction of the real properties covered by said notices.

Since the deficiency assessments on the sale had become final and unappealable and
were consequently enforceable by the summary remedy of levy, the Court of Appeals dismissed
the petition.

Issue/s

Whether or not the BIR is able to collect estate tax debts without the consent and
permission of the court overseeing the alleged will of the deceased through the levying and sale
of real estate owned by the decedent.

Held/Decision/Ratio

The court gave a clear reason in which why the petition was not accepted. On Nov 29,
1994, the court dismissed it on the grounds of deficiency income tax assessments and estate
tax assessments were final and unappealable. The prayer of injunction was not granted due to
the tax code specifically section 219 which “expressly prohibits courts from enjoining or
restraining the collection of any national internal revenue tax, fee, or charge imposed by the
Code, subject, however, to certain exceptions”, in which the petitioner failed to prove were
applicable. Although the reconsideration of the petition to review on certiorari was submitted by
the petitioner. The court emphasized that the petitioner’s objections cannot be raised via a
petition for certiorari under the pretext of grave abuse of discretion.

The petition is denied and CA decision is affirmed