This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2008-04-16 |
TINGA, J, |
||||
| We first consider Petron's argument that the "business taxes" on its sale of diesel fuels partakes of an excise tax, which if true, could invalidate the challenged tax solely on the basis of the phrase "excise taxes on articles enumerated under the [NIRC]." To support this argument, it cites Cordero v. Conda,[14] Allied Thread Co. Inc. v. City Mayor of Manila,[15] and Iloilo Bottlers, Inc. v. City of Iloilo,[16] as having explained that "an excise tax is a tax upon the performance, carrying on, or the exercise of an activity."[17] Respondents, on the other hand, argue that what the provision prohibits is the imposition of excise taxes on petroleum products, but not the imposition of business taxes on the same. They cite Philippine Petroleum Corporation v. Municipality of Pililia,[18] where the Court had noted, "[a] tax on business is distinct from a tax on the article itself."[19] | |||||