Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 167807 2011-12-06	MANOLITO AGRA v. COA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Section 5.5 of DBM-CCC No. 10 is clear that rice subsidy is one of the benefits that will be granted to employees of GOCCs [49] or GFIs [50] only if they are "incumbents" as of July 1, 1989. We reproduce the first paragraph of Section 5.5 below: 5.5 The following allowances/fringe benefits authorized to GOCCs/GFIs pursuant to the aforementioned issuances are not likewise to be integrated into the basic salary and allowed to be continued only for incumbents of positions as of June 30, 1989 who are authorized and actually receiving said allowances/benefits as of said date, at the same terms and conditions prescribed in said issuances[:]
	GR No. 178030 2010-12-15	PHILIPPINE FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS CARPIO, J.
The exercise of the taxing power of local government units is subject to the limitations enumerated in Section 133 of the Local Government Code.[9] Under Section 133(o)[10] of the Local Government Code, local government units have no power to tax instrumentalities of the national government like the PFDA. Thus, PFDA is not liable to pay real property tax assessed by the Office of the City Treasurer of Lucena City on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex, except those portions which are leased to private persons or entities.