Wednesday, September 14, 2016

CASE DIGEST: Commissioner on Internal Revenue vs Engineering Equipment G.R. No. L-27044 June 30, 1975

Facts:
·      Engineering Equipment and Supply Co. (Engineering for short), a domestic corporation, is an engineering and machinery firm. As operator of an integrated engineering shop, it is engaged, among others, in the design and installation of central type air conditioning system, pumping plants and steel fabrications.
·      On July 27, 1956, one Juan de la Cruz, wrote the then Collector, now Commissioner, of Internal Revenue denouncing Engineering for tax evasion by misdeclaring its imported articles and failing to pay the correct percentage taxes due thereon in connivance with its foreign suppliers. Engineering was likewise denounced to the Central Bank (CB) for alleged fraud in obtaining its dollar allocations. Acting on these denunciations, a raid and search was conducted by a joint team of Central Bank, (CB), National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) agents on September 27, 1956, on which occasion voluminous records of the firm were seized and confiscated
·      On September 30, 1957, revenue examiners Quesada and Catudan reported and recommended to the then Collector, now Commissioner, of Internal Revenue that Engineering be assessed for P480,912.01 as deficiency advance sales tax on the theory that it misdeclared its importation of air conditioning units and parts and accessories thereof which are subject to tax under Section 185(m)  of the Tax Code,
·      On March 3, 1959. the Commissioner assessed against, and demanded upon, Engineering payment of the increased amount and suggested that P10,000 be paid as compromise in extrajudicial settlement of Engineering's penal liability for violation of the Tax Code. The firm, however, contested the tax assessment and requested that it be furnished with the details and particulars of the Commissioner's assessment
·      Engineering appealed to the Court of Tax Appeals. CTA rendered  a decision in favor of Engineering, declared exempt from the deficiency manufacturers sales tax covering the period from June 1, 1948. to September 2, 1956. However, petitioner is ordered to pay respondent, or his duly authorized collection agent, the sum of P174,141.62 as compensating tax and 25% surcharge for the period from 1953 to September 1956. With costs against petitioner.
·      Not satisfied, both appealed before the SC. Since the two cases are similar, both will be tried together.

Issue:  W/ON Engineering is a manufacturer of air conditioning units under Section 185(m), supra, in relation to Sections 183(b) and 194 of the Code, or a contractor under Section 191 of the same Code.


Held:  Contractor.  The distinction between a contract of sale and one for work, labor and materials is tested by the inquiry whether the thing transferred is one not in existence and which never would have existed but for the order of the party desiring to acquire it, or a thing which would have existed and has been the subject of sale to some other persons even if the order had not been given.
The word "contractor" has come to be used with special reference to a person who, in the pursuit of the independent business, undertakes to do a specific job or piece of work for other persons, using his own means and methods without submitting himself to control as to the petty details. The true test of a contractor, would seem to be that he renders service in the course of an independent occupation, representing the will of his employer only as to the result of his work, and not as to the means by which it is accomplished.

Engineering, in a nutshell, fabricates, assembles, supplies and installs in the buildings of its various customers the central type air conditioning system; prepares the plans and specifications therefor which are distinct and different from each other; the air conditioning units and spare parts or accessories thereof used by petitioner are not the window type of air conditioner which are manufactured, assembled and produced locally for sale to the general market; and the imported air conditioning units and spare parts or accessories thereof are supplied and installed by petitioner upon previous orders of its customers conformably with their needs and requirements.

Source and Full Text: http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1975/jun1975/gr_27044_1975.html

No comments:

Post a Comment

Manila Electric Company vs. The City of Assessor and City Treasurer of Lucena City, GR No. 166102 dated August 5, 2015 (Protest)

  Facts: ·          MERALCO is a private corporation organized and existing under Philippine laws to operate as a public utility engaged i...