DOJ Opinion No. 107, s. 1980

DOJ OPINION NO. 107 , s. 1980 2nd Indorsement August 1, 1980 Respectfully returned to the Director, Bureau of Mines and Geo-Sciences, Manila, his within request for opinion concerning the realty taxes imposable on certain mining claims of the Benguet Consolidated, Inc. (BCI) at Bokod, Benguet. LLpr The enclosures show that BCI has Royalty Agreements with four (4) mining companies over mining claims situated in Bokod, Benguet Province, which claims were located pursuant to the Philippine Bill of 1902; that in compliance with P.D. No. 1214 (which took effect on October 14, 1977) requiring all locators under the said bill to secure under P.D. No. 463 mining lease contracts over their patentable claims, mining lease applications were filed with the Bureau of Mines for the four (4) mining claims mentioned above; that said mining lease applications are still pending approval by the Bureau of Mines; that the Municipal Treasurer of Bokod, Benguet Province has asked BCI to pay real estate taxes for the year 1979 on the said mining claims under Section 20(b) of Presidential Decree No. 464 and this position is concurred in by the Provincial Treasurer of Benguet Province; and that BCI maintains, on the other hand, that it is not liable for such real estate taxes prior to the issuance of the lease contract over said mining claims but only for the occupation fee of P2.00. Hence, the present request for a definitive ruling on whether or not the following "are subject to real property tax under Sections 18 and 20(d) of Presidential Decree No. 464 (Real Property Tax Code) in relation with Provincial Circular No. 3-73, dated January 24, 1973 of the then Secretary of Finance": "1. Mining claims located under the Philippine Bill of 1902 and converted . . . [to] lease application under PD 1214;" and "2. Mining claims located under Commonwealth Act No. 137 prior to the issuance of the mining leases." Please be advised that the laws relevant to the instant situation constrain us to refrain from rendering opinion on the present query. The opinions of the Minister of Justice are advisory in nature and cannot prevail over the rulings of the agency primarily charged with the enforcement of the law involved. (Opinion of the Secretary of Justice No. 64, s. 1972) In this particular case, the Minister of Finance, aside from having supervision over municipal and provincial treasurers, not only is primarily charged with the enforcement, administration and implementation of P.D. No. 464 but also issued Provincial Circular No. 3-73, supra . Wherefore, it is suggested that the present queries be referred to the Minister of Finance. (SGD.) RICARDO C. PUNO Minister of Justice