This is a civil case involving the Commissioner of Customs and Colgate-Palmolive Philippines, Inc. The legal issue in this case is whether the royalties paid by Colgate-Palmolive Philippines, Inc. to Colgate-Palmolive Corporation are dutiable and subject to customs duties and taxes. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) En Banc that the royalties are dutiable pursuant to Section 201 of Presidential Decree No. 1464, as amended by Republic Act Number 9135. However, only the royalty payments related to the goods imported from Colgate-Palmolive Corporation are subject to customs duties and taxes. The Supreme Court also agreed with the CTA En Banc that the Commissioner of Customs failed to comply with the requirements of Customs Memorandum Order (CMO) Nos. 1-2002 and 2-2002.
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 240253. October 3, 2018.]
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, petitioner,vs. COLGATE-PALMOLIVE PHILIPPINES, INC., respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated October 3, 2018 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 240253 (Commissioner of Customs v. Colgate-Palmolive Philippines, Inc.). — The motion for extension of time to file petition for review on certiorari filed by petitioner is GRANTED. TIADCc
After review, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure of petitioner to show any reversible error in the assailed ruling. The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) En Banc correctly sustained the ruling of the CTA First Division that the royalties paid by petitioner Colgate-Palmolive Philippines, Inc. to Colgate-Palmolive Corporation (CPC) are dutiable pursuant to Section 201 of Presidential Decree No. 1464 otherwise known as The Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines, as amended by Republic Act Number 9135. However, only the royalty payments related to the goods imported from CPC are subject to customs duties and taxes. The CTA En Banc is also correct that the Commissioner of Customs failed to comply with the requirements of Customs Memorandum Order (CMO) Nos. 1-2002 and 2-2002. The recommendation of the Post-Entry Audit Group cannot take the place of the complaint mandated under the CMOs.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. The January 4, 2018 Decision and June 4, 2018 Resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals in CTA EB Nos. 1471 and 1475 are hereby AFFIRMED.
The Office of the Solicitor General's manifestation stating that the petition for review on certiorari dated August 7, 2018 was filed through registered mail on August 13, 2018, is NOTED.
SO ORDERED." Bersamin, J.,on official travel.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court