REMEDIES

GOVERNMENT REMEDIES (Administrative)

Jurisdiction of the Bureau of Customs - Seizure & Forfeiture
The Collector of Customs has exclusive jurisdiction over seizure and forfeiture
proceedings, and regular courts cannot interfere with his exercise thereof or stifle or put
it at naught. The Collector of Customs sitting in seizure and forfeiture proceedings has
exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine all questions touching on the seizure and
forfeiture of dutiable goods (Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Rodriguez, G.R. No.
160270, April 23, 2010).

Search and Seizure by the PNP

Under Section 2203 of the TCCP, officers generally empowered by law to effect
searches, seizures and arrests when authorized by the BOC, can enforce tariff and
customs laws. Likewise, under RA 6975, the Criminal Investigation Unit of the PNP shall
undertake the monitoring, investigation and prosecution of all crimes involving economic
sabotage. PNP should coordinate with the BOC and obtain the written authority from the
Collector of Customs to conduct searches, seizures, or arrests (Raul Basilio D. Boac,
et.al. v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 180597, November 7, 2008).

Warrantless Seizure and Forfeiture of Importations

The Bureau of Customs acquires exclusive jurisdiction over imported goods, for the
purposes of enforcement of the customs laws, from the moment the goods are actually
in its possession or control, even if no warrant of seizure or detention had previously
been issued by the Collector of Customs in connection with seizure and forfeiture
proceedings (Papa v. Mago, G.R. No. L-27360, February 28, 1968).

The RTC has no jurisdiction to pass upon the validity or regularity of the seizure and
forfeiture proceedings conducted by the Bureau of Customs (Commissioner of Customs
v. Makasiar, G.R. No. 79307, August 29, 1989).

Even if the customs seizure is illegal, exclusive jurisdiction (to the exclusion of regular
courts) still belongs to the Bureau of Customs (Jao v. CA, G.R. No. 104604, October 6,
1995).

Search in Dwelling House

Any person exercising police authority may, at any time, enter, pass through, and
search any land, enclosure, warehouse, store, building or structure not principally used
as a dwelling house (R.A. 10863, Sec. 219).

Customs compromise does not extinguish criminal liability

Sec. 2307 of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines limits the effects of the
settlement to the liability that attaches to the property, or to the bond that replaces the
property. It does not speak of the liability that falls on the person or offender. (People v.
Desiderio, G.R. No. L-20805, November 29, 1965).
Reduction of Customs Duties/Compromise
Subject to approval of SOF, the Commissioner may compromise any administrative
case involving the imposition of fines, surcharges and surcharges, including those
arising from the conduct of a post clearance audit, unless otherwise specified by law.
Exception: Cases involving forfeiture proceedings shall not be subject to any
compromise (R.A. 10863, Sec. 1131).

Automatic Review for Adverse Decisions

When the decision of the Collector is adverse to the government, said decision is
automatically elevated to the Commissioner for review, and an adverse decision by the
Commissioner is also automatically elevated to the Secretary of Finance (R.A. 10863,
Sec. 1127-1128).

GOVERNMENT REMEDIES (Judicial)

Approval of Commissioner for court action
No civil or criminal action for recovery of duties or the enforcement of any fine, penalty
or forfeiture shall be filed in court without the approval of the Commissioner (R.A.
10863, Sec. 1135).

Jurisdiction of Regular Courts

An action to collect customs bond used to secure the payment of taxes is not a tax
collection case, but rather a simple case for enforcement of a contractual liability. The
CA has jurisdiction over the case (Philippine British Assurance Company, Inc. v.
Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 185588, February 2, 2010).

Although the subject matter of said bonds are internal revenue taxes, it cannot be
denied that upon the execution of said bonds, the tax-payer, as principal and the
bondsman, as surety, assumed a new and entirely distinct obligation and became
subject to an entirely different kind of liability (Republic of the Philippines v. Xavier Gun
Trading, G.R. No. L-17325 April 26, 1962).

TAXPAYERS REMEDIES

Protest
When a ruling or decision of the District Collector or customs officers involving goods
with valuation, rules of origin and other customs issues is made, the part adversely
affected may appeal by way of protest against such ruling or decision.
Exception: Fixing of fines in seizure cases (R.A. 10863, Sec. 1106).

Decision in Protest
The Commissioner shall render a decision within thirty (30) days from receipt of the
protest. In case the protest is sustained, in whole or in part, the appropriate order shall
be made, and the entry shall be reassessed, if necessary (R.A. 10863, Sec. 1110).
Abandonment
Expressly abandoned goods shall ipso facto be deemed the property of the Government
and shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of R.A. 10863.

The importer of impliedly abandoned goods may at any time within thirty (30) days after
the lapse of the prescribed period to file the declaration reclaim the goods.

When the Bureau sells impliedly abandoned goods, the proceeds of the sale, after
deduction of any duty and tax shall be turned over to those persons entitled to receive
them or if not possible, held at their disposal for a specified period. After the lapse of the
specified period, the balance shall be transferred to the forfeiture fund (R.A. 10863,
Sec. 1130).

Abatement & Refund

Abatement is the reduction or diminution, in whole or in part, of duties and taxes where
payment has not been made (R.A. 10863, Sec. 102(a)).
Refund is the return, in whole or in part, of duties and taxes paid on goods (R.A. 10863,
Sec. 102(ll)).

Abatement for Damage incurred during Voyage

No abatement of duties shall be made on account of damage incurred or deterioration
suffered during the voyage of importation and duties will be assessed on the actual
quantity imported (R.A. 10863, Sec. 905).

Refund of Duties and Taxes

Where it is established that duties and taxes have been overcharged as a result of an
error in the assessment or goods declaration (R.A. 10863, Sec. 903).

Liability of Commissioner for lost shipment

The Commissioner of Customs is liable to pay the value of the lost shipment based on
the acquisition cost at the time of payment, computed at the exchange rate prevailing at
the time of actual payment, after payment of the necessary customs duties.

The Commissioner cannot escape liability for the lost shipment of goods by invoking the
state immunity doctrine. The doctrine must be fairly observed and the State should not
avail itself of this prerogative to take undue advantage of parties that may have
legitimate claims against it (Commissioner of Customs v. AGFHA Incorporated, G.R.
No. 187425, March 28, 2011).

Appeal to CTA
The party aggrieved by the ruling or decisions of the Commissioner or the Secretary of
Finance may appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals in the manner and within the period
prescribed by law and regulations otherwise the decision of the Commissioner or the
Secretary shall be final and executor (R.A. 10863, Sec. 1136).
Except for the CTA, no court may issue any order or decision until all the remedies for
administrative appeal have been exhausted (R.A. 10863, Sec. 1137).