Central Board of Assessment Appeals: Resolution

You might also like

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Republic of the Philippines

CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS


Manila

RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OF THE


PHILIPPINES, INC.,
Petitioner-Appellant,

- versus -
CBAA CASE NO. M-09
LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS In Re:
OF THE PROVINCE OF SOUTH COTABATO, Tax Dec. Nos. 7639, 7640
Appellee, 7641 and 7642
LBAA Case No. 001
- and - Province of
South Cotabato
PROVINCIAL ASSESSOR AND TREASURER
OF SOUTH COTABATO, MUNICIPAL
ASSESSOR AND TREASURER OF TUPI,
SO. COTABATO,
Respondents-Appellees.
x------------------------------x

RESOLUTION

In a Motion for Reconsideration dated February 28, 1997, Petitioner-

Appellant, Radio Communications of the Philippines, Inc. (RCPI), alleged that it

received this Board’s Decision dated November 7, 1996 on February 18, 1997.

RCPI moved for the reconsideration of the decision of this Board which found:

1. That Petitioner-Appellant’s franchise, as amended, does not exempt

it from the payment of real property taxes;

2. That the properties in question are real properties under the purview

of the Real Property Tax Code; and

3. That the real property taxes on Petitioner-Appellant’s properties are

not unjust, excessive, erroneous, oppressive and confiscatory.

The Board finds the arguments herein raised by the petitioner-appellant

have been squarely answered in the Decision dated 7 November 1996 and this

Board does not find any compelling reason to reverse or modify said decision.

In the interest of equity and justice, this Board, represented by its

Chairman, Atty. Margarita G. Magistrado and its Hearing Officer for Visayas and

Acting Hearing Officer for Mindanao, Atty. Camilo L. Montenegro, in the presence

Reference: Book X, pp. 153-154


of RCPI’s counsel, Atty. George Arboleda, and RCPI’s representative, Mr. Lucio

Sajo, and the respondent assessors and treasurer, inspected the properties in

question situated in Tupi, South Cotabato. Findings of this Board on the ocular

inspection conducted failed to persuade us to change/reconsider the Board’s

position.

WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration is hereby denied for lack of

merit.

SO ORDERED.

Manila, Philippines, December 15, 1997.

(Signed)
MARGARITA G. MAGISTRADO
Chairman

(Signed) (Signed)
ANGEL P. PALOMARES BENJAMIN M. KASALA
Member Member

Reference: Book X, pp. 153-154

You might also like