Republic of the Philippines
CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS M a n I l a
VISAYAN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC. (VECO),
Petitioner-Appellant,
CBAA CASE NO. V-22 – versus –
THE CITY ASSESSOR OF TALISAY CITY, Respondent- Appellee
– and –
THE LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS OF TALISAY CITY,
Appellees,
x———————————————————–x
R E S O L U T I O N
Before us is an Appeal filed on 4 May 2005 by the Visayan Electric
Company, Inc., Inc. (VECO) from a Decision supposedly rendered by the Local
Board of Assessment Appeals of Talisay City (the “Local Board”).
The basis of VECO’s appeal is a letter (Annex “A” to the Appeal) dated
April 4, 2005, from the City Legal Officer of Talisay City, Atty. Aurora Econg, to
VECO, informing the latter “that it is the decision of the Local Board of
Assessment Appeals of Talisay City that VECO should pay its more than P16M
accountability to the said LGU.” No copy of the decision adverted to by Atty.
Econg was attached to, or enclosed with, her said letter.
This Board, through its Hearing Officer for Visayas, Atty. Camilo L.
Montenegro, in a communication under the date of May 17, 2005, requested the
Registrar of Deeds for Talisay City to transmit the complete original records of
the LBAA case to the CBAA Visayas Field Office pursuant to the provisions of
Section 5, Rule IV of the Rules of Procedure Before the Central Board of
Assessment Appeals.
Reference: Book XIII, pp. 47-53
On the same day, in accordance with the provisions of Section 4, Rule IV
of the said Rules of Procedure, the Hearing Officer for Visayas requested the
City Assessor of Talisay City to submit her answer or comment to the appeal.
On May 30, 2005, the City Legal Officer of Talisay City, on behalf of
Respondents-Appellees, filed with the CBAA-Visayas a Memorandum of Appeal
wherein she stated that “Talisay City being a fledgling city does not have yet a
Register of Deeds. RA 7160 provides that in the absence of a Register of Deeds,
the City Prosecutor can take its place. It has only an OIC Prosecutor . . . The
Chairman of the Board is the City Engineer and the Secretary appointed by the
Chairman is the City Legal Officer. . .”
The said Memorandum on Appeal does not disclose the date and place of
its preparation. Attached thereto, among others, are the following:
1. A “Verification/Certification” purportedly signed, subscribed and
sworn to by Mayor Socrates C. Fernandez of Talisay City on May 30, 2005 but
without the name, signature and other circumstances of the official administering
oath;
2. An undated “Appointment” (as Annex “G”) purportedly appointing the
City Legal Officer/City Administrator of Talisay City, Atty. Econg, as the Secretary
of the Local Board;
3. An “Oath of Office” purportedly signed, subscribed and sworn to by
Engr. Audie B. Bacasmas on April 1, 2005, in his capacity as Chairman of the
Local Board, but without the name and other circumstances of the official
administering the oath;
4. An unsigned “Oath of Office” purportedly for Atty. Mary Ann Castro,
OIC-City Prosecutor, as member of the Local Board;
5. As Annex “H”, purportedly the “Minutes of the meeting of the Local
Board of Assessment Appeals (LBAA) held on April 4, 2005 at the Office of the
City Legal Officer/City Administrator”, consisting of three (3) pages, “submitted”
by Atty. Aurora A. Econg, City Legal Officer/City Administrator, as Secretary of
Reference: Book XIII, pp. 47-53
the Local Board, and “approved” by Engr. Audie Bacasmas, as Chairman of the
Board.
The City Assessor of Talisay City, sometime on June 3, 2005, came
personally to the Visayas Field Office of this Board to verbally ask for extension
of the time within which to file her answer or comment to VECO’s appeal. She
was surprised to learn that the City Legal Officer of Talisay already filed a
Memorandum of Appeal on her (the City Assessor’s) behalf. Anyway, the
Hearing Officer granted her request.
Upon the oral confirmation by the City Assessor that, indeed, Talisay City
does not have a Registrar of Deeds and the City Engineer was acting as
Chairman of the Talisay City Local Board, the Hearing Officer decided to send a
written communication, dated June 9, 2005, requesting the City Engineer of
Talisay City to transmit the records of the case to the CBAA Visayas Field Office.
On July 1, 2005, the Local Board of Talisay City filed with the Visayas Field
Office of this Board the following documents, to wit:
1. A one-page supposed “decision” of the Local Board of Assessment
Appeals of Talisay City dated April 4, 2005;
2. A copy of the City Assessor’s “Reply on Notice of Appeal and
Memorandum of Appeal” dated February 10, 2004, with Annexes “A” to “D-4”;
3. A machine copy of VECO’s appeal before the Local Board of
Assessment Appeals of Talisay City dated December 23, 2003; and
4. A machine copy of the Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Appeal
filed by VECO with the Local Board.
The supposed “decision” mentioned in No. 1, above, is purportedly signed
by City Engineer Audie B. Bacasmas as Chairman of the Local Board and by an
unknown person supposedly for and on behalf of Atty. Mary Ann Castro, OIC-
City Prosecutor, as Member of the Local Board.
Reference: Book XIII, pp. 47-53
The “Reply” of the City Assessor, which was supposed to have been filed
with the Local Board, does not show that the same “Reply” was indeed filed with
the Local Board and there is no proof of service of a copy thereof to VECO.
In its appeal, VECO stated the first assigned error thus:
THE SUPPOSED DECISION OF THE LOCAL BOARD CONTAINED IN THE LETTER-DECISION IS NULL AND VOID BECAUSE IT WAS NOT RENDERED BY A COLLEGIAL LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, BUT BY A SINGULAR OFFICIAL OF TALISAY CITY. MOREOVER, VECO WAS DENIED ITS RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS BECAUSE NO HEARING WAS EVER CONDUCTED WHERE APPELLANT CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
In her “Memorandum of Appeal” filed on May 30, 2005 on behalf of
Respondent-Appllee, the Talisay City Legal Officer stated, as title to the
discussion of the first issue above-stated, that “The Decision On VECO’s appeal
is Not Singular. The City Legal Officer As Secretary Appointed By The
Assessment Board Was Commissioned To Inform VECO On The Board’s
Decision VECO Was Not Denied Due Process Of Law.” Then she proceeded to
say that “The Decision then which was transmitted to the Petitioner-Appellant
VECO was not a singular action. It was prepared by the City Legal Officer in her
capacity as Secretary to the Local Board of Assessment appointed as provided
under Sec. 227 of RA 7160. Machine copy is hereto attached and marked as
ANNEX “H” to form an integral part thereto.”
The Annex “H” referred to above is the supposed “Minutes” of the meeting
of the Local Board supposedly held on April 4, 2005. It is obvious, therefore, that
the Talisay City Legal Officer thought that her letter of April 4, 2005 which
“transmitted” the “decision” of the Local Board to VECO was sufficient in form
and substance and that a written formal decision by the Local Board was not
necessary.
It is noted that the supposed “meeting” of the Local Board on April 4, 2005,
or the “minutes” thereof, was not mentioned in that letter of April 4, 2005 from the
Talisay City Legal Officer to VECO. We believe, therefore, that both the
supposed “minutes” and the “decision” filed on July 1, 2005 were an afterthought.
The “minutes” were prepared after VECO’s Appeal; and the “decision”, only after
Reference: Book XIII, pp. 47-53
receipt of the Hearing Officer’s June 9, 2005 request for City Engineer of Talisay
City to transmit the records of the LBAA case to the CBAA Visayas Field Ofice.
In any case, neither the Talisay City Legal Officer’s letter of April 4, 2005,
nor the “minutes” of the Local Board’s meeting on April 4, 2005, nor the
“decision” filed on July 1, 2005, satisfies the requirements of Section 227 of the
Local Government Code of 1991, which we quote:
“SEC. 227. Organization, Powers, Duties, and Functions of the Local Board of Assessment Appeals. – (a) The Board of Assessment Appeals of the province or city shall be composed of the Registrar of Deeds, as Chairman, the provincial or city prosecutor and the provincial or city engineer as members, who shall serve as such in an ex officio capacity without additional compensation.
“(b) The Chairman of the Board shall have the power to designate any employee of the province or city to serve as secretary to the Board, also without additional compensation.
“(c) The Chairman and members of the Board of Assessment Appeals of the province or city shall assume their respective positions without need of further appointment or special designation immediately upon effectivity of this Code. They shall take an oath or affirmation of office in the prescribed form.
“(d) In provinces or cities without a provincial or city engineer, the district engineer shall serve as members of the Board. In the absence of the (provincial or city) Registrar of Deeds, or the provincial or city prosecutor, or provincial or city engineer, or the district engineer, the persons performing their duties, whether in an acting capacity or as duly designated officer-in-charge, shall automatically become the chairman or member, respectively, or the said Board, as the case may be.”
The Philippine Legislature clearly envisioned the Local Boards of
Assessment Appeals as collegial bodies. In accordance with the above-quoted
law, the decision, orders, or resolutions of a particular Local Board of
Assessment Appeals, to be valid at least in form, must be signed by at least the
Chairman and member of the said board or, if the Chairman is not available or
does not concur with the majority opinion, by the two (2) members of the said
board. The Chairman and/or members of the Local Board must personally sign
the decision, order, or resolution. No proxies are allowed in the Local Boards of
Assessment Appeals.
As stated in Section 230 of the Code, the Central Board of Assessment
Appeals shall have appellate jurisdiction over all assessment cases decided by
the Local Boards of Assessment Appeals. Section 1, Rule III, of the Rules of
Reference: Book XIII, pp. 47-53
Procedure Before the Central Board of Assessment Appeals, which is self-
explanatory, provides, thus:
“Section 1. – Appellate Jurisdiction. – The Central Board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide all appeals from the decision, orders, and resolutions of the Local Boards involving contested assessments of real properties, claims for tax refund and/or tax credits or overpayments of taxes.”
Even if we consider the “decision” supposedly dated April 4, 2005 but
actually filed on July 1, 2005 – long after the appeal of VECO and the Talisay
City Legal Officer’s Memorandum of Appeal were filed – as rendered in due
course, still, the same “decision” does not meet the requirements of Section 227
of the Code for being signed only by the City Engineer of Talisay.
WHEREFORE, in the absence of a valid decision, order or resolution, this
Board RESOLVED, as it does hereby resolve, to REMAND this case back to the
Local Board of Assessment Appeals for the City of Talisay and to ORDER the
City Engineer of Talisay City, as the Chairman of the said Local Board, to
henceforth convene the said Local Board and, thereafter, to consider the appeal
of the Visayan Electric Company, Inc. (VECO) filed with said Local Board.
SO ORDERED.
Manila, Philippines, July 15, 2005.
(Signed) CESAR S. GUTIERREZ
Chairman
(Signed)
ANGEL P. PALOMARES Member
(Signed) RAFAEL O. CORTES
Member
Reference: Book XIII, pp. 47-53