Bureau of Local Government Finance Opinion

December 20, 2000 BUREAU OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE OPINION Ms. Arsenia V. Avila No. 1 Rhombos Street Squareville Subdivision, San Bartolome C/O Novaliches Post Office, Quezon City M a d a m : This refers to your letter dated August 14, 2000 requesting assistance concerning the assessment made by the City Assessor's Office of Baguio City, on your real properties (lands) located in Camp 7, same city, viz : LOT NO. AREAS/SQ.M. FAAS/ARPNO. 2-D-1 237.5 96-06808-105786 2-D-2 237.5 96-06808-105787 2-E 410.0 96-06808-105784 2-F 385.0 96-06808-105785 2-G 361.0 96-06808-105789 2-H 362.0 96-06808-105788 You are questioning the alleged unlawful annotation made by the City Assessor's Office, on the abovementioned Real Property Field Appraisal and Assessment Sheet (FAAS) which reads, thus: "This lot is also declared in the name of Pacifico Pocdo under Declaration No. " In a letter dated November 10, 2000, the City Assessor of Baguio City submitted the following: 1. That the subject land, identified as lot 43 TS-39 located at Camp 7 Barangay, same city, covering an area of 92,999 square meters was originally declared in the name of Pocdo Pool under Tax Declaration No. 29300 effective 1985; cDSaEH 2. Tax Declaration No. 29300 superseded by Tax Declaration No. 41240 with an area of 66,370 square meters due to the sale of the portion (26,629 sq.m) to Josefa Solano and declared the said portion in her favor under TD No. 41241; 3. Tax Declaration No. 41240 covering an area of 56,377 square meters was superseded by Tax Declaration No. 48988 due to segregation of 9,993 square meters under Tax Declaration No. 48989 in the name of Polon Pocdo. 4. Tax Declaration No. 48989 with an area of 9,993 square meters was subsequently subdivided into twelve (12) lots wherein the total of 1,993 square meters was transferred to you (Arsenia Avila). 5. Tax Declaration No. 52627, superseded Tax Declaration No. 48988 in the name of Pocdo Pool with an area of 48,377 square meters and declared the portion with an area of 3,000 square meter in the name of Pacifico Pocdo after Extra-judicial Partition and Waiver to children under Tax Declaration Nos. 52619 to 52625, inclusive; SECAHa 6. That the double assessment notation started from the most recent tax declaration derived from the original Tax Declaration No. 29300. The said City Assessor also informed that the area declared in the name of Arsenia Avila was inadvertently plotted and extracted from lot 43, TS-39 not from the lot allotted to Polon Pocdo. She also submitted that both Pacifico Pocdo and Arsenia Avila claim ownership of the said area and a meeting of both parties was set last March 7, 2000 but no amicable settlement was reached. In this connection, attention is invited to the provision of Article IV(A)(2)(h) of the Manual on Real Property Tax Administration in the Philippines which provides as follows: "xxx xxx xxx "(h) Cancel all of the assessments, in case several assessments are made, but if any assessee or his representative shall object to the cancellation of the assessment made in his name, such assessment shall not be cancelled but the fact shall be noted on the tax declaration and assessment rolls and other property books of record . . . ." (Emphasis supplied) aIcDCA It is clearly stated from the abovequoted provisions of the said Manual that in case several assessments are made, the said assessments shall not be unilaterally cancelled in case an assessee shall object to the cancellation of the same and instead such facts (of double assessment/declaration) shall be noted on both tax declaration and assessment rolls and other property books of record. The City Assessor further agreed that "mere tax declaration does not rest ownership of the property in the declarant neither tax receipts are evidence of ownership or the right to possess real property when not supported by other effective proof ( Perez vs Court of Appeals , L-30351, Sept. 11, 1974; Elumbaring vs Elumbaring , 12 Phil. 384)." Accordingly, we find merit in the action taken by the City Assessor in making notations on the subject tax declarations. Moreover, considering that the subject matter (double assessment) clearly involves a question of ownership over the subject parcels of land, it is hereby suggested that the matter be resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. We trust that this will clarify matters. EaIDAT Very truly yours, (SGD.) BENJAMIN A. GERONIMO Executive Director