DOJ Opinion No. 085, s. 1991

DOJ OPINION NO. 085 , s. 1991 May 15, 1991 Mr. Antonio P. Belicena Assistant Secretary Revenue Operations Group Department of Finance Manila Sir : This has reference to your letter seeking the opinion of this Department "on the legal questions arising from the requests of the Manila Transport Service Cooperative (MTTSC) for exemption from customs duties and taxes under Article 61 of R.A. 6938, on its importation consisting of Sixty-two (62) units used cars (reconditioned) from Japan." LibLex Specifically, you pose the following queries: "1. Are cooperatives falling under Article 61 exempt from customs duties and taxes on importations? "2. In the affirmative case, are they bound to comply with the requirements under Article 62 such as the submission of a certificate that the articles imported are not available locally, issued by the Department of Trade and Industry? "3. Otherwise stated, does Article 61 cover only domestic transactions and does not include importations?" It appears that the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) in its indorsements dated April 1, 1991 and May 2, 1991 (see attached copies) has stated that cooperatives duly registered pursuant to the provisions of R.A. No. 6938 are entitled to enjoy the privileges granted to cooperatives by Article 61 of R.A. 6938. With regret, we are constrained to decline form rendering the opinion requested it appearing that the CDA has already adopted a definite stand on the matter . By established precedents, this Department has invariably declined to pass upon any issue that has previously been passed upon by the proper government body over which it possesses no revisory authority (Se. of Justice Op. No. 11, s. 1987; No. 91, s. 1980; Nos. 123 and 9, s. 1980; No. 99, s. 1987; No. 137, s. 1977). Under Article 123 of the Cooperative Code of the Philippines R.A. No. 6938, it is the CDA which is authorized to issue the necessary rules and regulations for the effective implementation of the Code, and, therefore, the task of implementing the same appropriately pertains to said office. Furthermore,. in whatever may we resolve the within request, our resolution would not be binding upon the party or parties whose substantive rights may be affected thereby, and who may, in all probability, challenge our opinion, which is merely advisory (Sec. of Justice Op. No. 46, s. 1985), before the appropriate court. Pursuant to settled precedents, we do not render opinion on queries which are justiciable in nature or which may be subject of judicial controversy (Sec. of Justice Op. No. 31, s. 1986; No. 36, s. 1984; No. 73, s. 1983; Nos. 43 and 126, s. 1979). prcd Very truly yours, (SGD.) FRANKLIN M. DRILON Secretary