G.R. No. L-15334 Case Digest

G.R. No. L-15334, January 31, 1964

Board of Assessment Appeals

vs Manila Electronic Company

Ponente: Paredes

Facts:

October 1902, Philippine Commission enacted Act. No. 484 authorizing the Municipal Board of Manila to grant a franchise to operate an electric street railway and electric light in Manila to the most favorable bid. Swift was awarded the franchise on March 1903.

Meralco's electric power is transmitted by means of electric transmission wires which are fastened to insulators on steel towers.

November 1955, city assessor of QC declared the steel towers (Espana, Kamuning and Kamias towers) for real property tax. After the denial of Meralco's petition to cancel the declarations, an appeal was taken to the Board of Assessment Appeals of QC, which required Meralco to pay real property tax for year 1952-1956. Meralco paid the amount under protest, and filed for review in CTA which rendered a decision to cancel the tax declarations and refund Meralco. The motion for reconsideration was denied too, an instant petition for review was filed.

CTA held that: (1) the steel towers come within the term "poles" which are declared exempt from taxes under part II paragraph 9 of respondent's franchise; (2) the steel towers are personal properties and are not subject to real property tax; and (3) the City Treasurer of Quezon City is held responsible for the refund of the amount paid.

The tax exemption privilege of the petitioner is quoted hereunder:

PAR 9. The grantee shall be liable to pay the same taxes upon its real estate, buildings, plant (not including poles, wires, transformers, and insulators), machinery and personal property as other persons are or may be hereafter required by law to pay ...

It is evident, that the word "poles", as used in Act No. 484 and incorporated in the petitioner's franchise, should not be given a restrictive and narrow interpretation, as to defeat the very object for which the franchise was granted. The poles as contemplated thereon, should be understood and taken as a part of the electric power system of the respondent Meralco, for the conveyance of electric current from the source thereof to its consumers.

Issue: Whether the steel towers constitute real properties, so that they can be subject to real property tax.

Article 415 of the Civil Code; the following are immovable property:

(1) Land, buildings, roads, and constructions of all kinds adhered to the soil;

x x x x x x x x x

(3) Everything attached to an immovable in a fixed manner, in such a way that it cannot be separated

therefrom without breaking the material or deterioration of the object;

x x x x x x x x x

(5) Machinery, receptacles, instruments or implements intended by the owner of the tenement for an industry

or works which may be carried in a building or on a piece of land, and which tends directly to meet the needs

of the said industry or works;

Held:

The steel towers or supports in question do not come within the objects mentioned in paragraph 1, because they do not constitute buildings or constructions adhered to the soil. They are not construction analogous to buildings nor adhering to the soil. As per description, given by the lower court, they are removable and merely attached to a square metal frame by means of bolts, which when unscrewed could easily be dismantled and moved from place to place. They cannot be included under paragraph 3, as they are not attached to an immovable in a fixed manner, and they can be separated without breaking the material or causing deterioration upon the object to which they are attached.

These steel towers or supports do not also fall under paragraph 5, for they are not machineries, receptacles, instruments or implements, and even if they were, they are not intended for industry or works on the land. Petitioner is not engaged in an industry or works in the land in which the steel supports or towers are constructed.

CTA erred.