Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 93 views

    30D G.R. No. 115852 October 30, 1995 PAL Vs Secretary of Finance

    Uploaded by

    Colin Morris
    1. The document discusses a case where PAL challenged the constitutionality of R.A. No. 7716, which amended Section 13/ of the National Internal Revenue Code to withdraw tax exemptions, including the exemption previously granted to PAL. 2. PAL argued that amending its franchise violated the constitutional requirement that a bill's title must express only one subject. However, the court held that R.A. No. 7716's title of restructuring the VAT system and amending relevant NIRC provisions was sufficient notice that Section 13/ could be amended. 3. The court also noted that a bill's title does not need to specify every means to accomplish the statute's general objectives, as

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    30D G.R. No. 115852 October 30, 1995 PAL Vs Secretary of Finance

    Uploaded by

    Colin Morris
    93 views1 page
    1. The document discusses a case where PAL challenged the constitutionality of R.A. No. 7716, which amended Section 13/ of the National Internal Revenue Code to withdraw tax exemptions, including the exemption previously granted to PAL. 2. PAL argued that amending its franchise violated the constitutional requirement that a bill's title must express only one subject. However, the court held that R.A. No. 7716's title of restructuring the VAT system and amending relevant NIRC provisions was sufficient notice that Section 13/ could be amended. 3. The court also noted that a bill's title does not need to specify every means to accomplish the statute's general objectives, as

    Original Description:

    32

    Original Title

    30D G.R. No. 115852 October 30, 1995 PAL vs Secretary of Finance

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1. The document discusses a case where PAL challenged the constitutionality of R.A. No. 7716, which amended Section 13/ of the National Internal Revenue Code to withdraw tax exemptions, including the exemption previously granted to PAL. 2. PAL argued that amending its franchise violated the constitutional requirement that a bill's title must express only one subject. However, the court held that R.A. No. 7716's title of restructuring the VAT system and amending relevant NIRC provisions was sufficient notice that Section 13/ could be amended. 3. The court also noted that a bill's title does not need to specify every means to accomplish the statute's general objectives, as

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    93 views1 page

    30D G.R. No. 115852 October 30, 1995 PAL Vs Secretary of Finance

    Uploaded by

    Colin Morris
    1. The document discusses a case where PAL challenged the constitutionality of R.A. No. 7716, which amended Section 13/ of the National Internal Revenue Code to withdraw tax exemptions, including the exemption previously granted to PAL. 2. PAL argued that amending its franchise violated the constitutional requirement that a bill's title must express only one subject. However, the court held that R.A. No. 7716's title of restructuring the VAT system and amending relevant NIRC provisions was sufficient notice that Section 13/ could be amended. 3. The court also noted that a bill's title does not need to specify every means to accomplish the statute's general objectives, as

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    1

    G.R. No. 115852 October 30, 1995 PAL vs Secretary of Fiace


    Facts:
    PAL maintains that R.A. No. 7716 violates Art. VI, 26 (1 o! the "onstit#tion
    $hich %rovi&es that '(ver) *ill %asse& *) "on+ress shall em*race onl) one s#*,ect
    $hich shall *e e-%resse& in the title thereo!.' PAL conten&s that the amen&ment o!
    its !ranchise *) the $ith&ra$al o! its e-em%tion !rom the VA. is not e-%resse& in
    the title o! the la$.
    P#rs#ant to 1/ o! P.0. No. 1123, PAL %a)s a !ranchise ta- o! 24 on its +ross
    reven#e 'in lie# o! all other ta-es, &#ties, ro)alties, re+istration, license an& other
    !ees an& char+es o! an) 5in&, nat#re, or &escri%tion, im%ose&, levie&, esta*lishe&,
    assesse& or collecte& *) an) m#nici%al, cit), %rovincial or national a#thorit) or
    +overnment a+enc), no$ or in the !#t#re.'
    PAL $as e-em%te& !rom the %a)ment o! the VA. alon+ $ith other entities *) 13/
    o! the NIR".
    R.A. No. 7716 see5s to $ith&ra$ certain e-em%tions, incl#&in+ that +rante& to PAL,
    *) amen&in+ 13/. .he amen&ment o! 13/ is e-%resse& in the title o! R.A. No.
    7716 $hich rea&s:
    AN A". R(6.R7".7RIN8 .9( VAL7(:A00(0 .A; (VA.
    6<6.(=, >I0(NIN8 I.6 .A; ?A6( AN0 (N9AN"IN8 I.6
    A0=INI6.RA.I@N, AN0 F@R .9(6( P7RP@6(6
    A=(N0IN8 AN0 R(P(ALIN8 .9( R(L(VAN.
    PR@VI6I@N6 @F .9( NA.I@NAL IN.(RNAL R(V(N7(
    "@0(, A6 A=(N0(0, AN0 F@R @.9(R P7RP@6(6.
    Iss#e:
    >hether the amen&ment in 6ec. 13/ o! the NIR" is em*race& in the title o! RA
    7716 not$ithstan&in+ that no re!erence $as ma&e o! P0 1123 therein.
    9el&:
    <es. ?) statin+ that R.A. No. 7716 see5s to 'AR(6.R7".7R(B .9( VAL7(:
    A00(0 .A; (VA. 6<6.(= A?<B >I0(NIN8 I.6 .A; ?A6( AN0
    (N9AN"IN8 I.6 A0=INI6.RA.I@N, AN0 F@R .9(6( P7RP@6(6
    A=(N0IN8 AN0 R(P(ALIN8 .9( R(L(VAN. PR@VI6I@N6 @F .9(
    NA.I@NAL IN.(RNAL R(V(N7( "@0(, A6 A=(N0(0 AN0 F@R @.9(R
    P7RP@6(6,' "on+ress there*) clearl) e-%resses its intention to amen& an)
    %rovision o! the NIR" $hich stan&s in the $a) o! accom%lishin+ the %#r%ose o! the
    la$.
    PAL asserts that the amen&ment o! its !ranchise m#st *e re!lecte& in the title o! the
    la$ *) s%eci!ic re!erence to P.0. No. 1123. It is #nnecessar) to &o this in or&er to
    com%l) $ith the constit#tional reC#irement, since it is alrea&) state& in the title that
    the la$ see5s to amen& the %ertinent %rovisions o! the NIR", amon+ $hich is
    13/(C, in or&er to $i&en the *ase o! the VA.. Act#all), it is the *ill $hich *ecomes
    a la$ that is reC#ire& to e-%ress in its title the s#*,ect o! le+islation. .he titles o! 9.
    No. 11127 an& 6. No. 16/3 in !act s%eci!icall) re!erre& to 13/ o! the NIR" as
    amon+ the %rovisions so#+ht to *e amen&e&. >e are satis!ie& that s#!!icient notice
    ha& *een +iven o! the %en&enc) o! these *ills in "on+ress *e!ore the) $ere enacte&
    into $hat is no$ R.A.
    No. 7716.
    .o reC#ire ever) en& an& means necessar) !or the accom%lishment o! the +eneral
    o*,ectives o! the stat#te to *e e-%resse& in its title $o#l& not onl) *e #nreasona*le
    *#t $o#l& act#all) ren&er le+islation im%ossi*le. A"oole), "onstit#tional
    Limitations, Dth (&., %. 227B
    .he &etails o! a le+islative act nee& not *e s%eci!icall) state& in its title, *#t matter
    +ermane to the s#*,ect as e-%resse& in the title, an& a&o%te& to the accom%lishment
    o! the o*,ect in vie$, ma) %ro%erl) *e incl#&e& in the act. .h#s, it is %ro%er to create
    in the same act the machiner) *) $hich the act is to *e en!orce&, to %rescri*e the
    %enalties !or its in!raction, an& to remove o*stacles in the $a) o! its e-ec#tion. I!
    s#ch matters are %ro%erl) connecte& $ith the s#*,ect as e-%resse& in the title, it is
    #nnecessar) that the) sho#l& also have s%ecial mention in the title. (6o#thern Pac.
    "o. v. ?artine, 173 Fe&. 721

    You might also like