Republic of the Philippines
CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS M a n I l a
MRS. CONSORCIA PRISNO, Petitioner-Appellant,
– versus –
CBAA CASE NO. V-20 Re: TD#02600159
CITY ASSESSOR OF TACLOBAN CITY,
Respondent-Appellee,
– and –
LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS OF TACLOBAN CITY,
Appellee. x——————————————————–x
D E C I S I O N
It appears from the records that Petitioner-Appellant, in a letter dated 31
July 2002, requested Respondent-Appellee for a re-evaluation of her building
covered by Tax Declaration No. 02600159, claiming that the market value of
P1,498,144.00 adopted by Respondent-Appellee was unjust and unfair
considering that the actual construction cost of the same building was only
P600,000.00
Having received no written reply, Petitioner-Appellant sent a follow-up
letter dated January 6, 2003 to Respondent-Appellee.
In his letter dated 07 January 2003, Respondent-Appellee stated that he
thought a reply to Petitioner-Appellant’s letter of 31 July 2002 was no longer
necessary since Petitioner-Appellant personally came to the City Assessor’s
Office before August 9, 2002, the date the City Assessor received said letter from
Petitioner-Appellant, that, on said occasion, Petitioner-Appellant’s request for re-
evaluation was discussed and Petitioner-Appellant was advised to elevate her
case to the Local Board of Assessment Appeals; that, after some time,
Petitioner-Appellant personally came back to say that she did not receive any
Notice of Assessment on subject property; that the Respondent-Appellee
Reference: Book X, pp. 68-72
informed Petitioner-Appellant that the said Notice was received by a certain Joel
Paragas, Petitioner-Appellant’s representative, on July 21, 2000 per a
certification issued on October 21, 2002 by the Philippine Postal Corporation;
that on 25 November 2002, Petitioner-Appellant personally came back to the
Assessor’s Office, carrying a note dated 25 November 2000 from the City
Administrator saying that Petitioner-Appellant did not know said Joel Paragas;
and that Petitioner-Appellant was again advised to elevate her case to the LBAA.
Petitioner-Appellant filed her appeal with the LBAA of Tacloban City on
January 20, 2003, stating that she could not file her appeal within the prescribed
period of sixty (60) days because of the fact that the person who received the
Notice of Assessment was unknown to her. She alleged that the assessment
complained of was very unjust and unfair considering that the actual cost of the
subject building was only P600,000.00, erected on a 35-square meter lot and
yielding P4,000.00 rental per month.
The Register of Deeds of Tacloban City, as Chairman of the Local Board
of Assessment Appeals of Tacloban City, sent to Petitioner-Appellant a letter-
decision dated March 24, 2003, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:
After a thorough and careful evaluation of the said appeal based on the Tax Declaration and Sketch Plan of the exact location of the said property which you have submitted to the Board, the undersigned, acting as Chairman of the LBAA, affirm and confirm the same finding made by the City Assessors Office.
“In view thereof, we are advising you to elevate this matter to the Central Board of Assessment Appeals, as provided for under Section 230 of The Local Government Code of 1991.”
Petitioner-Appellant’s instant appeal to the Central Board was postmarked
as registered on April 30, 2003 and ultimately received by this Board on May 13,
2003.
Alleging that she received a copy of the questioned letter-decision of the
LBAA of Tacloban City on March 30, 2003, Petitioner-Appellant stated that the
subject building was a three-storey structure built on a 35-square meter lot away
from the commercial district of Tacloban City, that said building was intended for
Reference: Book X, pp. 68-72
occupancy of only one family since a common stairway serving all floors was
located inside the building; that said building was rented for only P4,000.00 a
month; and that the market value of said building should have been less than
P600,000.00 – not P 1,498,144.00 – and the assessment level should have been
only 25% instead of 60%.
Section 227 of R.A. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government
Code of 1991, states that Local Board of Assessment Appeals of the province or
city shall be composed of: (1) the provincial or city Registrar of Deeds as
Chairman, (2) the provincial or city prosecutor and (3) the provincial or city
engineer as members.
As envisioned by Congress, the Local Boards are collegial and quasi-
judicial bodies. The Local Boards’ decisions on appeals before said boards
should have the assent of at least a majority – meaning, at least two (2) – of the
members of said boards.
Apparently, the letter-decision dated March 24, 2003 and signed solely by
the Chairman of the LBAA of Tacloban City is not in conformity with the law.
However, to remand this case back to the LBAA of Tacloban would be an
exercise of futility since the defect would be cured by just reproducing the same
letter-decision to be signed by at least a majority of the members of said local
board.
We have, therefore, opted to decide the instant appeal on its merits.
In her appeal to the local board, Petitioner-Appellant stated that she could
not file her appeal within the prescribed period because the person who received
the Notice of Assessment was unknown to her. The instant appeal is completely
silent on this matter. Nonetheless, we felt compelled to discuss this matter as it
pertains to the jurisdiction of the LBAA of Tacloban City.
Attached to Petitioner-Appellant’s appeal with the Local Board were,
among others, a copy of the Notice of Assessment of Real Property dated July
Reference: Book X, pp. 68-72
20, 2002 and a copy of the Certification issued by the Philippine Postal
Corporation on October 21, 2002.
Under the “Summary of Assessment” of said Notice were written
“Commercial Building” as Kind of Property, “02600159” as ARP NO.,
P1,498,144.00” as Market Value, and P898,890.00” as Assessed Value.
The certification issued by the Philippine Postal Corporation states that
“per records obtaining at Tacloban City Central Post Office, Reglet No. 1551
addressed to Consorcia D. Prisno of Rizal Ave., Ext. Quarry Dist., Tacloban City
was delivered and duly receipt by one Joel Paragas her representative on July
21, 2000.”
Petitioner-Appellant first complained on the alleged unjust and unfair
market value placed by the City Assessor on Petitioner-Appellant’s building
under Tax Declaration No. 02600159 in her letter dated 31 July 2002. She did
not say when and under what circumstances she got hold of the tax declaration.
It is safe to assume, however, that she got it together with the Notice of
Assessment since, as is customary, when a Notice is sent out, the corresponding
tax declaration is attached thereto.
Since the Notice was received by one Joel Paragas on July 21, 2000,
Petitioner-Appellant should have filed her appeal with the LBAA of Tacloban City
within sixty (60) days from then – or not later than September 19, 2000 –
pursuant to the provisions of Section 226 of R.A. 7160. Even granting arguendo,
that Petitioner-Appellant received the Notice as early as July 31, 2002 – the date
of her first letter to the City Assessor – she should have filed her appeal with the
Local Board not later than September 29, 2002. The appeal with the Local Board
was filed on January 20, 2003, clearly beyond the reglementary period
prescribed by law.
The instant appeal itself was filed (or mailed) late. Section 229(c) of R.A.
7160 states that “. . . The owner of the property or person having legal interest
therein or the assessor who is not satisfied with the decision of the (Local) Board
Reference: Book X, pp. 68-72
may, within thirty (30) days after receipt of the decision of said Board, appeal to
the Central Board of Assessment Appeals . . .” As stated hereinabove, the
appeal to this Board was postmarked as registered mail at the Tacloban City
Central Post Office on April 30, 2003. Contrary to Petitioner-Appellant’s
allegation that she received a copy of the Local Board’s decision on March 30,
2003, the copy of the same decision on file with the Local Board of Tacloban City
clearly shows that Petitioner-Appellant, Mrs. Consorcia Prisno, received a copy
thereof on March 28, 2003. The thirty-day period ended on April 27, 2003, three
(3) days before Petitioner-Appellant registered her appeal with the Tacloban City
Central Post Office.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is hereby
DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Manila, Philippines, February 27, 2004.
(Signed) CESAR S. GUTIERREZ
Chairman
(Signed)
ANGEL P. PALOMARES VACANT Member Member
Reference: Book X, pp. 68-72