Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
6. Who is the Presiding Justice of CTA during the time of this case happened?
Answer: Ernesto D. Acosta was the Presiding Justice that time.
8. Who is the Commissioner of Customs during the time of this case happened?
Answer: Guillermo L. Parayno Jr. was the Commissioner of Customs that time.
10. Who is the District Collector of MICP during the time of this case happened?
Answer: Atty. Buenaventura Maniego
12. May the aggrieved party of a decision, ruling or resolution by the court file a
petition for review En Banc even without filing a motion for reconsideration?
13. According to the decision of the Supreme Court, how will the Bureau pays
AGFHA Inc.?
Answer: The payment shall be taken from the sale or sales of goods properties
which were seized or forfeited by the BOC in other cases.
16. What is more appropriate rate of exchange to use, is it the rate of exchange at
the time of importation or the rate of exchange at the time of payment?
Answer: It is more appropriate to use the exchange rate prevailing at the time of
payment. The reason is considering the length of time that had been passed and
inflation rate rise up that causes the value of money differs from its value at the
time of importation which is 1992.
18. Why is it the importer of the 197 Bales of Textile Grey Cloth said to be fictitious?
Answer: According to the GR. No. 139050, the subject shipment were
consigned to GQ Garments, but could not located in its given address at 244
Escolta st., Binondo Manila, and thus was suspected to be fictitious.
19. What’s the connection of the GQ Garments in this case? (It doesn’t even
mentioned in the resolution)
Answer: Again, according to the GR. No. 139050, GQ Garments is actually the
consignee of the subject shipment according to its Bill of Lading and Inward
Freight Manifest.
20. If GQ Garments was the Consignee of the subject shipment, why is it the
AGFHA Inc. claims to be the owner of the said shipment?
Answer: Also, according to the Gr. No. 139050, the shipper which is the P.T.
Mandala Subur Textile Industry, mistakenly named the GQ Garments as the
consignee of the subject shipment when it is really the AGFHA Inc. who owns it.
They prove it with the Clean Report of Findings issued by Societe Generale de
Surveilance dated December 9, 1992, it mentioned AGFHA to be the consignee
of the subject shipment. AGFHA, Inc. also applied for amendment of the Inward
Freight Manifest filed by the shipper’s agent, FIL-JAPAN Shipping Company
Manila.
“Sec. 2530. Property Subject to Forfeiture under Tariff and Customs Laws. – Any
vehicle, vessel or aircraft, cargo, article and other objects shall, under the
following conditions be subjected to forfeiture:
“(4) On the strength of a false invoice or other document executed by the owner,
importer, exporter or consignee concerning the importation or exportation of such
article; and
“(5) Through any other practice or device contrary to law by means of which such
articles was entered through a customhouse to the prejudice of the government.“
Sec. 1113. Property Subject to Seizure and Forfeiture. – Property that shall be
subject to seizure and forfeiture include:
“(4) On the strength of a false invoice or other document executed by the owner,
importer, exporter or consignee concerning the importation or exportation of such
goods; or
“(5) Through any other practice or device contrary to law by means of which such
goods was entered through a customs office to the prejudice of the government.“
23. Why do you think the Judicial Courts dismissed the decision of the
Commissioner?
Answer: Because fraud must be proved to justify forfeiture. It must be actual,
amounting to intentional wrong doing with the clear purpose of avoiding the tax.
What is here involved is an honest mistake, which will not deprived the
government of its right to collect proper tax.
27. Is the Shipment under B/L? If yes, what is the B/L number?
Answer: Yes, the B/L no. is HKT-138899.
41. In your opinion, did the consignee committed falsification? Or perjury? Or none?
Answer: None of it was committed because AGFHA has evidences that they alter
the name of the consignee in the inward foreign manifest in a lawful way. Like,
filing application for amendment of inward foreign manifest.
44. What government agency does issues Certificate of Clearance of Importation for
the subject shipment?
Answer: Garments and Textile Import Services under DTI.
59. Do you think that using the EO 688 is correct on the part of the commissioner of
Customs? Why or why not?
Answer: He’s wrong with using the EO 688 because it is about ALIGNING THE
PHILIPPINE TARIFF NOMENCLATURE AND THE GENERAL RULES OF
CLASSIFICATION and it has nothing to do with the said circumstances.
66. About what is the case of DOH VS. CV Conchela and associates?
Answer:
67. Read the foot notes of Gr. No. 187425
Answer:
69. Why is it AGFHA appeal to the CTA and not in any other court?
Answer: