Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 119 views

    Farolan vs. CTA, 217 SCRA 298

    Uploaded by

    Aliyah Sanders
    The Court of Tax Appeals reversed the decision of the Commissioner of Customs regarding the forfeiture of 1,600 rolls of screen net that arrived in Manila and were confiscated. The Commissioner of Customs appealed this decision. While the case was pending, the court ordered the release of the goods due to deterioration from exposure to the elements. However, upon inspection, private respondent found that over 26,000 yards were damaged, resulting in a claim against the Bureau of Customs for the lost goods. The Supreme Court ruled that the Bureau of Customs cannot be held liable for damages because, as a government agency, it has sovereign immunity from lawsuits without consent.

    Copyright:

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

    Farolan vs. CTA, 217 SCRA 298

    Uploaded by

    Aliyah Sanders
    119 views1 page
    The Court of Tax Appeals reversed the decision of the Commissioner of Customs regarding the forfeiture of 1,600 rolls of screen net that arrived in Manila and were confiscated. The Commissioner of Customs appealed this decision. While the case was pending, the court ordered the release of the goods due to deterioration from exposure to the elements. However, upon inspection, private respondent found that over 26,000 yards were damaged, resulting in a claim against the Bureau of Customs for the lost goods. The Supreme Court ruled that the Bureau of Customs cannot be held liable for damages because, as a government agency, it has sovereign immunity from lawsuits without consent.

    Original Description:

    Farolan

    Original Title

    Farolan

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Court of Tax Appeals reversed the decision of the Commissioner of Customs regarding the forfeiture of 1,600 rolls of screen net that arrived in Manila and were confiscated. The Commissioner of Customs appealed this decision. While the case was pending, the court ordered the release of the goods due to deterioration from exposure to the elements. However, upon inspection, private respondent found that over 26,000 yards were damaged, resulting in a claim against the Bureau of Customs for the lost goods. The Supreme Court ruled that the Bureau of Customs cannot be held liable for damages because, as a government agency, it has sovereign immunity from lawsuits without consent.

    Copyright:

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

    Farolan vs. CTA, 217 SCRA 298

    Uploaded by

    Aliyah Sanders
    The Court of Tax Appeals reversed the decision of the Commissioner of Customs regarding the forfeiture of 1,600 rolls of screen net that arrived in Manila and were confiscated. The Commissioner of Customs appealed this decision. While the case was pending, the court ordered the release of the goods due to deterioration from exposure to the elements. However, upon inspection, private respondent found that over 26,000 yards were damaged, resulting in a claim against the Bureau of Customs for the lost goods. The Supreme Court ruled that the Bureau of Customs cannot be held liable for damages because, as a government agency, it has sovereign immunity from lawsuits without consent.

    Copyright:

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

    Farolan vs.

    CTA, 217 SCRA 298


    This is a petition for review on certiorari which seeks to annul and set aside the decision of the Court of
    Tax Appeals dated December 27, 1974 reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Customs which
    affirmed the decision of the Collector of Customs.

    Facts
    On January 30, 1972 a misdeclared shipment containing 80 bales of screen net, each bale containing 20
    rolls or a total of 1,600 rolls, arrived at manila consigned to Bagong Buhay Trading was forfeited in favor
    of the government.

    Private respondent then appealed the decision of the Collector of Customs by filing a petition for review
    with the Commissioner of Customs but the Commissioner affirmed the Collector of Customs. The
    respondent then moved for reconsideration but it was denied.

    From the Commissioner of Customs, private respondent elevated his case before the Court of Tax
    Appeals. Upon review, the Court of Tax Appeals reversed the decision of the Commissioner of Customs.
    It ruled that the Commissioner erred in imputing fraud upon private respondent because fraud is never
    presumed and thus concluded that the forfeiture of the articles in question was not in accordance with
    law.

    Thereafter, the Commissioner of Customs moved for reconsideration but was denied.

    On August 20, 1976, private respondent filed a petition asking for the release of the questioned goods
    which this Court denied. After several motions for the early resolution of this case and for the release of
    goods and in view of the fact that the goods were being exposed to the natural elements, the court then
    ordered the release of the goods.

    After opening the shipment the private respondent alleges that out of the 143,454 yards (64 bales)
    released to Bagong Buhay, only 116,950 yards were in good condition and the 26,504 yards were in bad
    condition. Consequently, private respondent demands that the Bureau of Customs be ordered to pay for
    damages for the 43,050 yards 13 it actually lost.

    Issue
    WON the Collector of Customs may be held liable for the 43,050 yards actually lost by private
    respondent.

    Rulling
    Bureau of Customs cannot be held liable for actual damages that the private respondent sustained with
    regard to its goods. Otherwise, to permit private respondent's claim to prosper would violate the doctrine
    of sovereign immunity. On this point, the political doctrine that "the state may not be sued without its
    consent," categorically applies. As an unincorporated government agency without any separate juridical
    personality of its own, the Bureau of Customs enjoys immunity from suit. Along with the Bureau of Internal
    Revenue, it is invested with an inherent power of sovereignty, namely, taxation. As an agency, the
    Bureau of Customs performs the governmental function of collecting revenues which is definitely not a
    proprietary function. Thus, private respondent's claim for damages against the Commissioner of Customs
    must fail.

    You might also like