Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c1bd3?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[PEOPLE v. F. E. GEEENFIELD](https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c1bd3?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c1bd3}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. 43435, Aug 28, 1936 ]

PEOPLE v. F. E. GEEENFIELD +

DECISION

63 Phil. 367

[ G. R. No. 43435, August 28, 1936 ]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. F. E. GEEENFIELD, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

D E C I S I O N

AVANCEƃ'A, C.J.:

The appellant is  charged with violation of section 4 of municipal ordinance No. 1, series of 1934, of the municipality of Manapla, Occidental  Negros.  It is alleged that in January,  1934, the accused, then manager of the North Negros Sugar Co., Inc., established and operated a talking cinematograph without paying the tax corresponding to the first  quarter  of said year.

It has been proven that the accused, in a building erected for said  purpose, established  and operated, through payments, a talking cinematograph wherein not only the laborers of said  corporation  but also the public  in  general were  admitted.

Section 4 of municipal ordinance No. 1, series of 1934, of the municipality of Manapla, compels every operator of a talking cinematograph to pay  quarterly in  advance a municipal license tax of P300 annually.  This tax has been levied by virtue of the authority conferred  upon  the municipal council by section 1 of Act No. 3422 to impose license taxes upon persons engaged in any occupation or business.

The appellant  contends  that the cinematograph established by him is not of the nature of  a business, the only purpose thereof being to provide  the  laborers of the  corporation, of which he is the manager, with amusement and relaxation and to prevent their having  to go to other places in search of amusement.  It appears, however, that the entrance fee charged is such that it enables him not only to defray the regular operating expenses but also to cover the value of the machine and the building in  which the cinematograph is established.  This  being so,  the enterprise has the character of a business, inasmuch as it is for the purpose  of gain.  For purposes  of .the tax, the proceeds obtained after deducting all  the  expenses necessary  for the  operation  of the business,  constitute gain. In this sense, after all the expenses of operating the cinematograph are paid and the value of the machine and the building recovered, these machine and building, in  so far as they represent  value,  would  constitute  a gain in  the operation of  the cinematograph.

For the foregoing considerations, the appealed judgment ordering the appellant to pay a fine of P25 and a license fee of P75  for the  first quarter of the year  1934, with the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment in  case of insolvency, is affirmed,  with the costs.  So ordered.

Villa-Real,  Abad Santos, Imperial, Diaz, Recto,  and Laurel, JJ., concur.

tags