DOJ Opinion No. 204, s. 1989

DOJ OPINION NO. 204 , s. 1989 October 18, 1989 The Commissioner Bureau of Customs Manila Sir : This refers to the request for opinion on a Memorandum Circular of the Land Transportation Office ("LTO") regarding payment of taxes or customs duties of the so-called "chop-chop" motor vehicles. LibLex You state that on June 16, 1988, the Bureau of Customs, Bureau of Internal Revenue and the LTO entered into a Memorandum of Agreement which seeks to prohibit the registration or renewal of registration of "chop-chop" vehicles, unless their owners present proofs of payment of the required taxes and duties; that said agreement was executed pursuant to a decision of the Court of Appeals upholding the requirement for the payment of such taxes and duties; that as a result of said agreement, the voluntary tax payment campaign for "chop-chop" vehicles earned P270 million since 1988; that in August 1989, the LTO issued a memorandum circular granting exemption from taxes and duties to all "chop-chop" vehicles registered in 1984 and prior thereto; that pursuant to said issuance, the LTO has been granting tax exemption certificates to hundreds of "chop-chop" vehicle owners, most of whom now refuse to pay their delinquent taxes and duties, while those who have already paid are seeking refunds; and that consequently, the average monthly take of the voluntary payment campaign has been reduced by one half since August. You now seek opinion on the following query is: "a. "Has the LTO the legal authority to grant tax exemption amounting to tax amnesty? "b. "Does the said LTO memorandum circular not violate the aforesaid Tripartite Agreement among the LTO, BIR and BOC? "c. "Who has the power to grant tax exemption/amnesty for non-payment to customs duties and taxes?" With regret, we are constrained to decline opinion on the foregoing queries since any such opinion would be tantamount to a review of the official actuation of the LTO. By settled practice and precedents, the Secretary of Justice does not rule on officials actions/actuations of other government offices or agencies. (Secretary of Justice Ops. No. 22 s. 1977; No. 181, s. 1976; No. 9, s. 1987; No. 141, s. 1988). Besides, resolution of the issues raised herein would inevitably affect the substantive rights of the "chop-chop" vehicle owners who were granted exemptions by the LTO pursuant to the aforesaid memorandum circular and any opinion that we shall render, being merely advisory in nature, would have no binding effect upon them and who, if the opinion is adverse to their interests, might decide to have the question resolved by the courts ( Id ., No. 31, s. 1985; No. 98, s. 1978; No. 72, s. 1971; No. 14, s. 1989). prcd We believe the instant controversy can properly be resolved by the Secretaries of Finance and of Transportation and Communication, the department heads concerned in this case. Very truly yours, (SGD.) EDUARDO G. MONTENEGRO Undersecretary of Justice Officer-In-Charge