Procter & Gamble Philippine Manufacturing Corp. v. Commissioner of Customs

[CA-G.R. SP No. 24495. August 21, 1991.] (C.T.A. Case No. 2788) PROCTER & GAMBLE PHILIPPINE MANUFACTURING CORPORATION , petitioner , vs . COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS and COURT OF TAX APPEALS , respondents . R E S O L U T I O N LUNA , J p : On May 7, 1991, this Court rendered judgment in this case, the dispositive portion of which reads: "WHEREFORE, that portion of the decision appealed from is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE, and another one is entered, ordering the respondent Commissioner of Customs to refund to petitioner Procter & Gamble Philippine Manufacturing Corporation the amount of P16,228.00, representing the overpaid advance sales taxes, and directing the said respondent to cause/make the advice to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue." The Office of the Solicitor General filed a motion for reconsideration, praying that the decision be reconsidered and set aside, on the ground that: In Commissioner of Customs vs. Procter and Gamble Philippine Manufacturing Corporation and Honorable Court of Tax Appeals, G.R. No. 56705, January 31, 1989, involving the correct determination of the home consumption value of the shipment in question, the Supreme Court set aside and reversed the aforementioned Decision of the Court of Tax Appeals dated February 27, 1981 and ordered private respondent (petitioner) to pay the additional customs and taxes due for the subject importation. The dispositive portion of the Decision reads as follows: "WHEREFORE, the decision of public respondent Court of Tax Appeals dated February 27, 1981 is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and another judgment is hereby rendered affirming in toto the decision of petitioner Commissioner of Customs dated March 9, 1976 upholding the decision of the Collector of Customs of Manila of June 20, 1975 requiring private respondent to pay the sum of P34,680.00 representing additional customs duty and taxes due for the subject importation. No pronouncement as to costs." The petitioner filed an opposition to the motion and prayed for its denial, on the ground, among others, that respondent "has come to court . . . too late in the day to chance the . . . decision." The motion for reconsideration is meritorious. The ground is clear. On January 31, 1989 or during the pendency of this case, the Supreme Court, in G.R. No. 56705, entitled: "The Commissioner of Customs, petitioner vs. Procter and Gamble Philippine Manufacturing Corporation and Honorable Court of Tax Appeals, respondents," rendered a decision, ordering respondent corporation, petitioner in this case, "to pay the sum of P34,680.00 representing additional customs duty and taxes due for the subject importation." The petitioner and respondents did not call the attention of this Court about that decision. Of the sum of P34,680.00, We ordered the petitioner Commissioner of Customs, private respondent in this case, to refund to petitioner the amount of P16,228.00 representing the overpaid advance sales taxes, . . ." The final decision of the High Court, therefore, removed and rendered baseless, petitioner's quest for refund of the sum of P16,228.00 representing the advance sales taxes it had paid for the subject importation. WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration is hereby GRANTED. The decision dated May 7, 1991 is reconsidered and set aside. Another decision is rendered dismissing the petition for review of the decision dated February 27, 1981 rendered by the respondent Court of Tax Appeals in CTA Case No. 2788. SO ORDERED. Camilon and Magsino, JJ ., concur.