Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 558 views

    Sarasola V Trinidad

    Uploaded by

    gel94
    Gregorio Sarasola filed a complaint seeking to restrain the Collector of Internal Revenue from illegally collecting taxes. The court sustained the Collector's demurrer, finding that under Sections 1578-1579 of the Administrative Code, injunction is not available to restrain tax collection and interest cannot be imposed on taxes illegally collected from the State. The Supreme Court affirmed, establishing that interest cannot be imposed against the State in recovery of illegally collected taxes unless authorized by statute.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Sarasola V Trinidad

    Uploaded by

    gel94
    558 views1 page
    Gregorio Sarasola filed a complaint seeking to restrain the Collector of Internal Revenue from illegally collecting taxes. The court sustained the Collector's demurrer, finding that under Sections 1578-1579 of the Administrative Code, injunction is not available to restrain tax collection and interest cannot be imposed on taxes illegally collected from the State. The Supreme Court affirmed, establishing that interest cannot be imposed against the State in recovery of illegally collected taxes unless authorized by statute.

    Original Description:

    Tax 1

    Original Title

    Sarasola v Trinidad

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Gregorio Sarasola filed a complaint seeking to restrain the Collector of Internal Revenue from illegally collecting taxes. The court sustained the Collector's demurrer, finding that under Sections 1578-1579 of the Administrative Code, injunction is not available to restrain tax collection and interest cannot be imposed on taxes illegally collected from the State. The Supreme Court affirmed, establishing that interest cannot be imposed against the State in recovery of illegally collected taxes unless authorized by statute.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    558 views1 page

    Sarasola V Trinidad

    Uploaded by

    gel94
    Gregorio Sarasola filed a complaint seeking to restrain the Collector of Internal Revenue from illegally collecting taxes. The court sustained the Collector's demurrer, finding that under Sections 1578-1579 of the Administrative Code, injunction is not available to restrain tax collection and interest cannot be imposed on taxes illegally collected from the State. The Supreme Court affirmed, establishing that interest cannot be imposed against the State in recovery of illegally collected taxes unless authorized by statute.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    1) SARASOLA v.

    TRINIDAD

    Facts: Gregorio Sarasola filed a complaint for injunction to restrain Wenceslao Trinidad, the Collector of
    Internal Revenue from the alleged illegal collection of taxes. CIR interposed a demurrer to the complaint stating
    that under Section 1578 of the Administrative Code, injunction is not available to restrain collection of tax. CIR
    also alleged the complaint did not entitle the plaintiff to the relief demanded as under Section 1579, it disallows
    interest on the internal revenue taxes in the sum alleged to have been illegally collected. The judge of CFI
    Manila sustained the demurrer, basing his decision from the case of Churchill v Rafferty. Sarsola argued that
    the provisions under Sec 1578-1579 are unconstitutional.

    Issue: Whether an interest can be imposed against the State in cases of recovery of taxes illegally collected.

    Ruling: YES. It is well settled both on principle and authority that interest is not to be awarded against a
    sovereign government unless its consent has been manifested by an Act of its Legislature or by a lawful
    contract of its executive officers. If there be doubt upon the subject, that doubt must be resolved in favor of the
    State. The state never pays interest unless she expressly engages to do so.

    Our own statute not only does not authorize interest but negatives the payment of interest. The law is valid,
    or that Sarasola has not proven such a case of irreparable injury as would warrant the issuance of the
    extraordinary writ of execution.

    2)

    You might also like