Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 625 views

    Republic Vs Patanao

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous XsaqDYD
    Patanao was acquitted in a criminal case for failure to file income tax returns and pay income taxes. However, the government still pursued Patanao civilly to collect the unpaid taxes. The Supreme Court held that (1) the acquittal in the criminal case did not preclude the civil case for tax collection, as civil tax liability arises from earning income, not from any criminal act; and (2) collection of the unpaid taxes could not have been reserved in the criminal case, as criminal prosecution is not a remedy for tax collection under the law - the tax obligation exists independently of any criminal charges.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Republic Vs Patanao

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous XsaqDYD
    625 views1 page
    Patanao was acquitted in a criminal case for failure to file income tax returns and pay income taxes. However, the government still pursued Patanao civilly to collect the unpaid taxes. The Supreme Court held that (1) the acquittal in the criminal case did not preclude the civil case for tax collection, as civil tax liability arises from earning income, not from any criminal act; and (2) collection of the unpaid taxes could not have been reserved in the criminal case, as criminal prosecution is not a remedy for tax collection under the law - the tax obligation exists independently of any criminal charges.

    Original Description:

    tax

    Original Title

    Republic vs Patanao

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Patanao was acquitted in a criminal case for failure to file income tax returns and pay income taxes. However, the government still pursued Patanao civilly to collect the unpaid taxes. The Supreme Court held that (1) the acquittal in the criminal case did not preclude the civil case for tax collection, as civil tax liability arises from earning income, not from any criminal act; and (2) collection of the unpaid taxes could not have been reserved in the criminal case, as criminal prosecution is not a remedy for tax collection under the law - the tax obligation exists independently of any criminal charges.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    625 views1 page

    Republic Vs Patanao

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous XsaqDYD
    Patanao was acquitted in a criminal case for failure to file income tax returns and pay income taxes. However, the government still pursued Patanao civilly to collect the unpaid taxes. The Supreme Court held that (1) the acquittal in the criminal case did not preclude the civil case for tax collection, as civil tax liability arises from earning income, not from any criminal act; and (2) collection of the unpaid taxes could not have been reserved in the criminal case, as criminal prosecution is not a remedy for tax collection under the law - the tax obligation exists independently of any criminal charges.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    REPUBLIC VS PATANAO (1967)

    12 Nov 2017

    [L-22356, July 21, 1967] Civil Law| Taxation

    FACTS:
    Pedro B. Patanao, an Agusan timber concessionaire, was prosecuted for failure to file income tax
    returns and for non-payment of income tax. He was ACQUITTED. Later, the government sued
    him civilly for the collection of the tax due. Patanao alleges that the civil claim cannot prosper
    anymore because:

    1. He was already acquitted in the criminal case;


    2. The collection of the tax was not reserved in the criminal action.
    HELD:
    1. The acquittal in the criminal case is not important. Under the Revised Penal Code, civil
    liability is the result of a crime; in the Internal Revenue Code, civil liability arises first, i.e.,
    civil liability to pay taxes arises from the fact that one has earned income or has engaged in
    business, and not because of any criminal act committed by him. In other words, criminal
    liability comes only after failure of the debtor to satisfy his civil obligation.
    2. The collection of the tax could not have been reserved in the criminal case – because criminal
    prosecution is not one of the remedies stated in the law for the collection of the tax. (Pp vs
    Arnault, L-4288, Nov 20, 1952; Pp vs Tierra, L-17177-17180, Dec 28, 1964). Indeed civil
    liability is not deemed included in the criminal proceeding. The tax certainly is not a mere
    civil liability arising from a crime, that could be wiped out by the judicial declaration of non-
    existence of the criminal acts charged. (Castro vs Internal Revenue, L-12174, April 20, 1962).

    You might also like