Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    G.R. No. L-11075

    Uploaded by

    Rudy Gerald Badillo
    This document is a 1960 Supreme Court of the Philippines case involving the seizure and forfeiture of Philippine peso bills and U.S. dollars found on a passenger attempting to travel to Hong Kong. The Court of Tax Appeals had ruled that the peso bills should be returned, but the Commissioner of Customs appealed. The Supreme Court reversed, finding that Philippine peso bills can be considered "merchandise" under the law and therefore subject to seizure if attempted to be exported beyond limits set by Central Bank regulations, just as U.S. dollars in the country would be. The ruling upheld the forfeiture of the peso bills.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    G.R. No. L-11075

    Uploaded by

    Rudy Gerald Badillo
    11 views2 pages
    This document is a 1960 Supreme Court of the Philippines case involving the seizure and forfeiture of Philippine peso bills and U.S. dollars found on a passenger attempting to travel to Hong Kong. The Court of Tax Appeals had ruled that the peso bills should be returned, but the Commissioner of Customs appealed. The Supreme Court reversed, finding that Philippine peso bills can be considered "merchandise" under the law and therefore subject to seizure if attempted to be exported beyond limits set by Central Bank regulations, just as U.S. dollars in the country would be. The ruling upheld the forfeiture of the peso bills.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is a 1960 Supreme Court of the Philippines case involving the seizure and forfeiture of Philippine peso bills and U.S. dollars found on a passenger attempting to travel to Hong Kong. The Court of Tax Appeals had ruled that the peso bills should be returned, but the Commissioner of Customs appealed. The Supreme Court reversed, finding that Philippine peso bills can be considered "merchandise" under the law and therefore subject to seizure if attempted to be exported beyond limits set by Central Bank regulations, just as U.S. dollars in the country would be. The ruling upheld the forfeiture of the peso bills.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    11 views2 pages

    G.R. No. L-11075

    Uploaded by

    Rudy Gerald Badillo
    This document is a 1960 Supreme Court of the Philippines case involving the seizure and forfeiture of Philippine peso bills and U.S. dollars found on a passenger attempting to travel to Hong Kong. The Court of Tax Appeals had ruled that the peso bills should be returned, but the Commissioner of Customs appealed. The Supreme Court reversed, finding that Philippine peso bills can be considered "merchandise" under the law and therefore subject to seizure if attempted to be exported beyond limits set by Central Bank regulations, just as U.S. dollars in the country would be. The ruling upheld the forfeiture of the peso bills.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    L-11075 1/24/24, 12:04 AM

    Today is Wednesday, January 24, 2024

    Constitution Statutes Executive Issuances Judicial Issuances Other Issuances Jurisprudence International Legal Resources AUSL Exclusive

    Republic of the Philippines


    SUPREME COURT
    Manila

    EN BANC

    G.R. No. L-11075 June 30, 1960

    COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, petitioner and appellant,


    vs.
    CARIDAD CAPISTRANO, respondent and appellee.

    Office of the Solicitor General Ambrosio Padilla and Solicitor Felicisimo R. Rosete for petitioner.
    Capistrano & Capistrano for respondent.

    PARAS, C.J.:

    On March 31, 1955, Caridad Capistrano was booked as an outgoing passenger of a plane bound for Hongkong.
    When she was subjected to the customary search by a woman agent of the Bureau of Customs immediately before
    the plane she was to board took off, there were found in her person one hundred and fifty six (156) pieces of
    Philippine 50-peso bills, seventeen (17) pieces of U.S. 20-dollar bills and one (1) piece of U.S. 10-dollar bill,
    although her license from the Central Bank allowed her to carry only $200, broken down into $50.00 in cash and
    $150.00 in traveler's check. Consequently, the bills were seized for alleged violation of Central Bank Circulars Nos.
    42 and 55, in relation to Section 1363 (f) of the Revised Administrative Code.

    In the seizure and forfeiture proceedings correspondingly instituted, the Collector of Customs rendered on May 5,
    1955, a decision ordering the forfeiture in favor of the Government of the bills in question. This decision was
    affirmed by the Commissioner of Customs on July 29, 1955. Dissatisfied, Caridad Capistrano brought the matter to
    the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA Case No. 174).

    In its decision of June 4, 1956, the Court of Tax Appeals ruled that while Circulars Nos. 37, 20, 42 and 55 were
    promulgated by the Monetary Board pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 265, said circulars did not,
    however, authorize the seizure and forfeiture of the Philippine peso bills carried by herein petitioner in excess of that
    allowed by the Central Bank regulations. The Tax Court further said that neither could Section 1363 (f) of the
    Revised Administrative Code be invoked because said section referred merely to "merchandise or prohibited
    importation or exportation."

    Taking judicial notice of the fact that the United States dollar has already ceased to be legal tender in the Philippines
    and that it could be bought and sold in the country, the Tax Court held that the U. S. dollar falls within the term
    "merchandise". However, the same thing was not said of the Philippine peso. Hence, the decision of the
    Commissioner of Customs, insofar as the one hundred and fifty six (156) pieces of Philippine 50-peso bills were
    concerned, was reversed, and said bills were ordered to be returned to petitioner Caridad Capistrano. From that
    portion of the decision, the Commissioner of Customs has appealed to this Court.

    Confining ourselves to the determination of the question as to whether the Court of Tax Appeals erred in revoking
    the order of forfeiture of the Philippine peso bills and ordering their release to the appellee, we believe, after careful
    reflection, that the ruling of the Tax Court has to be reversed.

    Section 1363 (f) of the Revised Administrative Code relied upon by the appellant reads as follows:

    Any merchandise of prohibited importation or exportation, the importation or exportation of which is effected

    https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1960/jun1960/gr_l-11075_1960.html Page 1 of 2
    G.R. No. L-11075 1/24/24, 12:04 AM

    or attempted contrary to law, and all other merchandise which, in the opinion of the collector, have been used,
    are or were intended to be used as instrument in the importation or exportation of the former.

    There can scarcely be any doubt that Philippine money may be exported or brought out of the country. Indeed, the
    Court of Tax Appeals recognized this fact in the decision appealed from. That such exportation ultimately affects the
    stability of the peso cannot be denied. As clearly explained by the Tax Court, it was in the light of compelling
    economic reasons and necessities that Central Bank Circulars Nos. 37 and 42, prohibiting the exportation of
    Philippine bills and coins, subject to certain exceptions, were conceived and promulgated.

    We believe that Philippine peso bills come within the concept of "merchandise," as this term is understood in
    Section 1363(f) of the Revised Administrative Code. As defined by the same Code, merchandise, when used with
    reference to importations or exportations, includes goods, wares, and in general anything that may be the subject of
    importation or exportation. (Sec. 1419.) It cannot be gainsaid that money may be a commodity — an object of trade.

    Money in the country where it is current, is both a measure of value and a medium of exchange, while in other
    countries it is a commodity bought and sold in the market, and its value fluctuates in the market like that of
    other commodities. (58 C. J. S. 845, citing Richard vs. American Union Bank, 170 N. E. 532, 535, 69 A. L. R.
    667.)

    In the same manner that in the Philippines the United States dollar bills which have ceased to be legal tender, are
    considered merchandise, the Philippine peso bills when attempted to be exported, as in the present case, may be
    deemed to have been taken out of domestic circulation as legal tender and treated as commodity. Hence, they may
    be forfeited pursuant to Central Bank Circular No. 37 in relation to Section 1363 (f) of the Revised Administrative
    Code.

    Wherefore, the decision appealed from is reversed. So ordered.

    Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, and Gutierrez
    David, JJ., concur.

    The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation

    https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1960/jun1960/gr_l-11075_1960.html Page 2 of 2

    You might also like