(006) Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Campos Rueda, 42 SCRA 23

September 27, 2017 | Author: Pilyang Sweet | Category: Inheritance Tax, Estate Tax In The United States, Taxes, Internal Revenue Service, Internal Revenue Code
Share Embed Donate


Short Description

12345...

Description

Title: Collector of Internal Revenue vs Campos Rueda 42 SCRA 23 October 29, 1971

Petitioner: Collector of Internal Revenue Respondent: Antonio Campos Rueda Ponente: Fernando J. Nature: Appeal Facts: •





• •

Maria Cerderia, a Spanish national (Filipina married to a Spanish citizen) who lived in Tangier, Morroco from 1931 until the time of her death in 1955, left the respondent Antonio Campos Rueda to administer her intangible properties. Rueda filed a provisional estate and inheritance tax return on all the properties of Maria Cerderia. On the real estate the respondent, as administrator of Cerderia’s estate, paid the sum of P111,582.00 as estate tax and the sum of P151,791.48 as inheritance tax, on the transfer of the real properties in the Philippines, but refused to pay the corresponding deficiency estate and inheritance taxes due on the transfer of her intangible personal properties, claiming that the estate is exempt from the payment of said taxes pursuant to section 122 of the Tax Code and that he could avail of the reciprocal provisions of our Tax Code. The Collector of Internal Revenue denied the exemption of the said taxes on the grounds that there is no reciprocity because Tangier is a mere principality not a foreign country. In a decision CIR assessed the estate of the deceased, as deficiency estate and inheritance taxes, the sum of P161,874.95 including interest and penalties, on the transfer of intangible personal properties of Maria Cerdeira The matter was elevated to the Court of Tax Appeals. CTA affirmed the exemption of taxes of Rueda in accordance with Tangier law. The cas was elevated to the Supreme Court and was brought back to CTA for review.

Issues: •

Whether or not the requisites of statehood, or at least so much thereof as may be necessary for the acquisition of an international personality, must be satisfied for a "foreign country" to fall within the exemption of Section 122 of the National Internal Revenue Code

Held: •



“Foreign Country” used in Sec 122 of the National Internal Revenue Code, refers to a government of that foreign power which although not an international person in the sense of international law, DOES NOT impose transfer of death taxes upon intangible personal properties of citizens not residing therein. Or whose law allows a similar exemption from such taxes. It is not necessary that Tangier should have been recognized by our government in order to entitle the petitioner to the exemption benefits provided by our Tax Law. Collector of Internal Revenue v. De Lara, 16 it was specifically held by us: “Considering the State of California as a foreign country in relation to section 122 of our Tax Code we believe and hold, as did the Tax Court, that the Ancilliary Administrator is entitled the exemption from the inheritance tax on the intangible personal property found in the Philippines.” 17 There can be no doubt that California as a state in the American Union was in the alleged requisite of international personality. Nonetheless, it was held to be a foreign country within the meaning of Section 122 of the National Internal Revenue Code.

Hence, the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals is affirmed.

View more...

Comments

Copyright ©2017 KUPDF Inc.