This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-03-16 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Documentary stamp tax is a tax on documents, instruments, loan agreements, and papers evidencing the acceptance, assignment, sale or transfer of an obligation, right or property incident thereto.[36] It is in the nature of an excise tax because it is imposed upon the privilege, opportunity or facility offered at exchanges for the transaction of the business. It is an excise upon the facilities used in the transaction of the business distinct and separate from the business itself.[37] | |||||
|
2006-07-27 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| BPI alleges that the assailed decision must be reversed since the sale between BPI and the Central Bank of foreign exchange, as distinguished from foreign bills of exchange, is not subject to the documentary stamp taxes prescribed in Section 195 (now Section 182) of the NIRC. This argument leaves much to be desired. In this case, it is not the sale of foreign exchange per se that is being taxed under Section 195 of the NIRC. This section refers to a documentary stamp tax, which is an excise upon the facilities used in the transaction of the business separate and apart from the business itself.[14] It is not a tax upon the business itself which is so transacted, but it is a duty upon the facilities made use of and actually employed in the transaction of the business, and separate and apart from the business itself.[15] | |||||