Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Caltex Phil., Inc. v. Board of Assessment Appeals
Caltex Phil., Inc. v. Board of Assessment Appeals
Caltex Phil., Inc. v. Board of Assessment Appeals
PHILIPPINE,
INC
V.
BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT
APPEALS
(G.R. NO. L-50466 MAY 31, 1982)
This case is about the realty tax
on machinery and equipment
installed by Caltex (Philippines) Inc.
in its gas stations located on leased
land.
FACTS:
The
Said machines
machines and andequipment
equipment
are
loaned by Caltex
consists to gas station operators
of underground tanks,
under an appropriate
elevated lease water
tank, elevated agreement or
tanks,
receipt. It is stipulated in the lease
water tanks, gasoline pumps,
contract that the operators, upon
computing pumps,
demand, shall water
return to pumps,
Caltex car
the
washer,
machinescarandhoists, truck hoists,
equipment in goodair
compressors
condition as and
whentireflators.
received, ordinary
wear and tear excepted.
The lessor of the land, where the gas
station is located, does not become the
owner of the machines and equipment
installed therein.
The city assessor of Pasay City
characterized the said items of gas station equipment
and machinery as taxable realty.
ISSUE:
The said equipment and machinery, as
YES. The pieces
appurtenances to ofthe gas equipment
gas station station and
machinery are subject to realty tax.
building or shed owned by Caltex (as to
which it is subject to realty tax) and
which fixtures are necessary to the
operation of the gas station, for without
them the gas station would be useless,
and which have been attached or
RULING:
affixed permanently to the gas station
site or embedded therein, are taxable
improvements and machinery within the
meaning of the Assessment Law and
the Real Property Tax Code
Under the
Caltex invokes
Realtythe
Taxrule
Code,
in the
improvements
case of Davaoon land
Sawmill
are
Co. v. Castillo
commonly taxed
thatasmachinery
realty evenwhich
though
is movable
for someinpurposes
its nature
only becomes
they might be considered
immobilized personalty.
when placed On inthea other
plant byhand,
the
owner of the property
“machinery” embraces
or plant but
“machines,
not when so mechanical
placed by a
tenant, a usufructuary,
contrivances, instruments, or appliances
any person and havingapparatus
only a
temporarytoright,
attached the real
unless
estate.”
such person acted as the agent of
the owner. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the issue
being raised in the case of the Davao Sawmill Case is
different from the issue being raised in this instant case.
This case is also easily distinguishable from Board of
Assessment Appeals vs. Manila Electric Co., 119 Phil. 328, where
Nor are
Meralco's Caltex's
steel towersgas station
were equipment
considered andwithin
poles machinery the
the meaning of
same as
paragraph 9 oftools
its and equipment
franchise whichinexempts
the repairitsshop of from
poles a bustaxation.
The company
steel towerswhich wereconsidered
were held to be personal
personalty property
becausenot they were
subject
attached to realtymetal
to square tax (Mindanao
frames by Bus Co. vs.ofCity
means Assessor,
bolts and could be
moved116 Phil.place
from 501).to place when unscrewed and dismantled.
PREPARED BY: JAMIAH HULIPAS
THANK YOU