Republic of the Philippines
Department of Finance
CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS
7/F EDPC Bldg., BSP Complex
Roxas Boulevard, Manila
LUZON HYDRO CORPORATION and NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION,
CBAA CASES NOS. L-96 & L-99
-versus- (LBAA Case No. 08-01-03)
LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS OF THE PROVINCE OF ILOCOS SUR,
FATIMA A. TENORIO, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS PROVINCIAL ASSESSOR OF ILOCOS SUR; ANTONIO A. GUNDRAN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE PROVINCIAL TREASURER OF ILOCOS SUR; REYNALDO BOTERES, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE MUNICIPAL ASSESSOR OF ALILEM, ILOCOS SUR; AND CRISTINA MONDERIN, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE MUNICIPAL TREASURER OF ALILEM, ILOCOS SUR,
X- – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – -/
On September 26, 2012, this Board rendered a Decision in the above-entitled case.
Not satisfied, Petitioners-Appellants filed separate Motions for Reconsideration: that of the National Power Corporation (“NPC”) was filed through registered mail on October 23, 2012 and reached this Office on November 5, 2012; and that of Luzon Hydro Corporation (“LHC”) was also filed through registered mail on November 14, 2012 and reached this Office on November 15, 2012.
Alleging that it received a copy of the assailed Decision on October 16, 2012, NPC presents the following as its
GROUNDS FOR RECONSIDERATION
THE SUBJECT MACHINERIES AND EQUIPMENT ARE ACTUALLY, DIRECTLY AND EXCLUSIVELY USED BY NPC, HENCE EXEMPT FROM REAL PROPERTY TAXES.
IF THESE MACHINERIES AND EQUIPMENT ARE TAXABLE, THEY SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS SPECIAL CLASS AND THUS SUBJECT TO 10% ASSESSMENT LEVEL UNDER SECTION 216 OF RA 7160.
THE IMPOSITION BY THE MUNICIPAL ASSESSOR OF AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF FIFTY-FIVE PERCENT (55%) ON THE VALUE OF THE MACHINERIES AND EQUIPMENT AS STATED IN THE SWORN DECLARATION PURPORTEDLY REPRESENTING INSTALLATION COST AND FREIGHT CHARGES IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE ASSESSED VALUE IS NOT SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
Co-Petitioner-Appellant LHC, on the other hand, alleged that it received a copy of the assailed Decision on October 30, 2012 and “submits that the Decision is erroneous and should be reconsidered, for the following reasons:
I. The cases of NPC v. Province of Quezon and FELS Energy, Inc. v. Province of Batangas used by this Honorable Board in support of the Decision are inapplicable to the present case.
II. This Honorable Board failed to appreciate that the Real Property of the Bakun Hydro Plant (“BHP”) subject of the disputed assessments are exempt from real property tax (“RPT”) because NPC is the actual, direct, and exclusive user of these properties and therefore, the same are exempt under Section 234(c) of the Local Government Code of 1991 (the “LGC”).
III. Assuming arguendo that the exemption under Section 234(c) of the LGC does not apply, the Honorable Board failed to appreciate that the Real Property should be considered under the “special class” of property subject to a 10% assessment level under Section 216 and 218 of the LGC.
IV. Assuming arguendo that the Real Property is subject to RPT, this Honorable Board failed to appreciate that Petitioner is not the party liable therefor.
V. The conclusion made by the Honorable Board on the correctness of the disputed assessments in (sic) not supported by the evidence on record.”
All the grounds or reasons for reconsideration and the arguments therefor raised by both NPC and LHC were thoroughly discussed and duly considered in the assailed Decision.
WHEREFORE, absent any cogent reason to disturb this Board’s Decision of September 28, 2012, the instant Motion for Reconsideration of Luzon Hydro Corporation and of National Power Corporation are hereby DENIED for lack or merit.
Manila, Philippines, March 21, 2013.
OFELIA A. MARQUEZ
ROBERTO D. GEOTINA CAMILO L. MONTENEGRO