This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-01-13 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| Tax statutes must be reasonably construed as to give effect to the whole act. Their constituent provisions must be read together, endeavoring to make every part effective, harmonious, and sensible.[209] That construction which will leave every word operative will be favored over one that leaves some word, clause, or sentence meaningless and insignificant.[210] | |||||
|
2013-08-19 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| At the outset, this Court's minute resolution on Mirant is not a binding precedent. The Court has clarified this matter in Philippine Health Care Providers, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue[14] as follows:It is true that, although contained in a minute resolution, our dismissal of the petition was a disposition of the merits of the case. When we dismissed the petition, we effectively affirmed the CA ruling being questioned. As a result, our ruling in that case has already become final. When a minute resolution denies or dismisses a petition for failure to comply with formal and substantive requirements, the challenged decision, together with its findings of fact and legal conclusions, are deemed sustained. But what is its effect on other cases? | |||||
|
2011-02-23 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| As explained by this Court in Philippine Health Care Providers, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue:[22] | |||||