Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 541 views

    Francia Vs Intermediate Appellate Court

    Uploaded by

    GyLyoung Sandz-Gold
    Engracio Francia owned a residential lot that had a portion expropriated by the government for which he was paid. He failed to pay real estate taxes and his property was sold at public auction. Ho Fernandez bought the property. The Supreme Court ruled that internal revenue taxes cannot be the subject of compensation and a person cannot refuse to pay taxes by claiming the government owes them an amount. Taxes are a duty to the government based on public policy, not a contractual relationship.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Francia Vs Intermediate Appellate Court

    Uploaded by

    GyLyoung Sandz-Gold
    541 views2 pages
    Engracio Francia owned a residential lot that had a portion expropriated by the government for which he was paid. He failed to pay real estate taxes and his property was sold at public auction. Ho Fernandez bought the property. The Supreme Court ruled that internal revenue taxes cannot be the subject of compensation and a person cannot refuse to pay taxes by claiming the government owes them an amount. Taxes are a duty to the government based on public policy, not a contractual relationship.

    Original Description:

    Taxation Case Digest

    Original Title

    Francia vs Intermediate Appellate Court

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Engracio Francia owned a residential lot that had a portion expropriated by the government for which he was paid. He failed to pay real estate taxes and his property was sold at public auction. Ho Fernandez bought the property. The Supreme Court ruled that internal revenue taxes cannot be the subject of compensation and a person cannot refuse to pay taxes by claiming the government owes them an amount. Taxes are a duty to the government based on public policy, not a contractual relationship.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    541 views2 pages

    Francia Vs Intermediate Appellate Court

    Uploaded by

    GyLyoung Sandz-Gold
    Engracio Francia owned a residential lot that had a portion expropriated by the government for which he was paid. He failed to pay real estate taxes and his property was sold at public auction. Ho Fernandez bought the property. The Supreme Court ruled that internal revenue taxes cannot be the subject of compensation and a person cannot refuse to pay taxes by claiming the government owes them an amount. Taxes are a duty to the government based on public policy, not a contractual relationship.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No. L-67649 June 28, 1988 ENGRACIO FRANCIA, petitioner, vs.

    INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and HO FERNANDEZ, respondents.

    FACTS: EngracioFrancia is the registered owner of a residential lot and a two-story house built upon it situated at Barrio San Isidro, now District of Sta. Clara, Pasay City, Metro Manila. The lot, with an area of about 328 square meters. On October 15, 1977, a 125 square meter portion of Francia's property was expropriated by the Republic of the Philippines for the sum of P4,116.00 representing the estimated amount equivalent to the assessed value of the aforesaid portion. Since 1963 up to 1977 inclusive, Francia failed to pay his real estate taxes. Thus, on December 5, 1977, his property was sold at public auction by the City Treasurer of Pasay City pursuant to Section 73 of Presidential Decree No. 464 known as the Real Property Tax Code in order to satisfy a tax delinquency of P2,400.00. Ho Fernandez was the highest bidder for the property.

    ISSUE: Whether or not internal revenue taxes can be the subject of compensation.

    RULING: No. SC ruled that there can be no off-setting of taxes against the claims that the taxpayer may have against the government. A person cannot refuse to pay a tax on the ground that the government owes him an amount equal to or greater than the tax being collected. The collection of a tax cannot await the results of a lawsuit against the government. A claim for taxes is not such a debt, demand, contract or judgment as is allowed to be set-off under the statutes of set-off, which are construed uniformly, in the light of public policy, to exclude the remedy in an action or any indebtedness of the state or municipality to one who is liable to the state or municipality for taxes. Neither are

    they a proper subject of recoupment since they do not arise out of the contract or transaction sued on. ... (80 C.J.S., 7374). "The general rule based on grounds of public policy is well-settled that no set-off admissible against demands for taxes levied for general or local governmental purposes. The reason on which the general rule is based, is that taxes are not in the nature of contracts between the party and party but grow out of duty to, and are the positive acts of the government to the making and enforcing of which, the personal consent of individual taxpayers is not required. ..."

    You might also like