Real Property Tax

Question 1

What is the nature of real property tax?

Answer 1

1. It is a Local tax;
2. It is an Ad valorem tax;
   NOTE: Ad valorem tax is a levy on real property
   determined on the basis of a fixed proportion of
   the value of money.
3. It is Proportionate because the tax is calculated
   on the basis of a certain percentage of the value
   assessed;
4. It creates a single Indivisible obligation; and
5. It is Direct tax on the ownership of real
   property.

Question 2

What are the fundamental principles of real property taxation?

Answer 2

1. real property shall be appraised at its current and fair market value
2. Real property shall be classified for assessment purposes on the basis of its actual use
3. Real property shall be assessed on the basis of a uniform classification within each local political subdivision
4. The appraisal, assessment and levy of real property for taxation purposes and the collection of the real property tax shall not be
   Let to any private persons, and
5. The appraisal and assessment of real property shall be equitable

Question 3

What is fair market value?

Answer 3

It is the amount which a purchaser willing but not compelled to buy would pay an owner of the property, and the latter willing but not compelled to sell would accept as the consideration or price therefor

Question 4

What is actual use?

Answer 4

Refers to the principal and predominant utilization of the property by the person in possession thereof pursuant to section 199(b) of the code

Question 5

What is real property tax?

Answer 5

Real property tax is a direct tax on ownership of lands and buildings or other improvements thereon not specially exempted and is payable regardless of whether the property is used or not, although the value may vary in accordance with such factor

Question 6

Who are responsible for the administration of the real property tax?

Answer 6

The provinces and cities, including the
municipalities within the Metropolitan Manila Area, shall be primarily responsible for the proper,
efficient, and effective administration of the real
property tax. (Sec. 200, LGC)

Question 7

Capitol Wireless is in the business of
providing international telecommunications
services. Capwire has signed agreements with
other local and foreign telecommunications
companies covering an international network of
submarine cable systems. The local government
of Batangas considered the submarine cable
systems as real property subject to real
property tax. Is the local government of
Batangas correct?

Answer 7

YES. Submarine or undersea communications
cables are akin to electric transmission lines which
are “no longer exempted from real property tax” and may qualify as “machinery” subject to real
property tax under the LGC. Both electric lines and
communications cables, in the strictest sense, are
not directly adhered to the soil but pass-through
posts, relays or landing stations, but both may be
classified under the term “machinery” as real
property under Art. 415(5) of the Civil Code because such pieces of equipment serve the owner’s business or tend to meet the needs of his industry or works that are on real estate.

Question 8

True or False. A public hearing is required before an enactment of a real property tax.

Answer 8

False. No public hearing shall be required before
the enactment of a local tax ordinance levying the
basic real property tax.

Question 9

The City of Makati levied and auctioned off a
real property after the registered owners failed
to pay the corresponding taxes. Spouses Cruz,
owners of the property, claimed that the sale
was null and void because the notice of billing
statements for real property were mistakenly
sent to a different unit; no warrant of levy was
ever received by them; the notice of delinquency
sale was not posted; the delinquency sale was
not published; the Makati Treasurer’s Office did
not notify them of the warrant of levy; and the
City did not remit the excess of the proceeds of
the sale to them. Is the delinquency sale valid?

Answer 9

: NO. The Local Government Code provides that
notice of delinquency and notice of delinquency sale must be posted at the main hall and in a publicly accessible and conspicuous place in each barangay of the local government unit concerned. They shall also be published once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks, in a newspaper of general
circulation in the province, city, or municipality.
Failure to strictly comply with the requisites of the
LGC renders the delinquency sale null and void. As
the tax sale was null and void, the title of the buyer
therein is also null and void.

Question 10

What is an improvement?

Answer 10

It is a valuable addition made to a property or an
amelioration in its condition, amounting to more
than a mere repair or replacement of parts involving capital expenditures and labor, which is intended to enhance its value, beauty, or utility or to adapt it for new or further purposes. (Sec. 199 (m), LGC)

Question 11

When is an improvement taxable?

Answer 11

Requisites for Taxability of Improvement: (E-SI)
1. It must Enhance the value of the property;
2. It must be Separately assessable; and
3. It can be treated Independently from the main
property.

Question 12

Kinds of Real Property Tax and Special Levies:
(S-I-R-E)

Answer 12

1. Special levy by LGUs; (Sec. 240, LGC)
2. Additional ad valorem tax on Idle lands; (Sec.
   236, LGC)
3. Basic Real property tax; and
4. Additional levy on real property for the Special
   Education Fund. (Sec. 235, LGC)

Question 13

Special Levy or Special Assessment by LGUs

Answer 13

A province, city or municipality may impose a
special levy on the lands within its territorial
jurisdiction specially benefited by public works
projects or improvements by the LGU concerned.

Question 14

What is the exception for special levy or assessments on public works?

Answer 14

It shall not apply to lands exempt from basic
real property tax and the remainder of the land,
portions of which have been donated to the LGU
concerned for the construction of such projects or
improvements. (Sec. 240, LGC)

Question 15

The Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan
enacted Provincial Ordinance No. 332-A, Series
of 1995, entitled “An Ordinance Approving and
Adopting the Code Governing the Revision of
Assessments, Classification and Valuation of
Real Properties in the Province of Palawan”
(Ordinance) Chapter 5, Sec. 48 of the Ordinance
provides for an additional levy on real property
tax for the special education fund at the rate of
one-half percent or 0.5% as follows: Sec. 48-
Additional Levy on Real Property Tax for Special
Education Fund. There is hereby levied an
annual tax at the rate of one-half percent (1/2%)
of the assessed value property tax. The proceeds
thereof shall exclusively accrue to the Special
Education Fund (SEF).
On post-audit, the auditor noticed supposed
deficiencies in the special education fund
collected by the Municipality of Narra. Hequestioned the levy of the special education
fund at the rate of only 0.5% rather than at 1%,
the rate stated in Sec. 235. Does the local
government unit have discretion on the rate at
which they are to collect the real property tax
for special education fund?

Answer 15

YES. The limits on the level of additional levy for
the special education fund under Sec. 235 of the
Local Government Code should be read as granting fiscal flexibility to local government units. Sec. 235’s permissive language is unqualified. Moreover, there is no limiting qualifier to the articulated rate of 1% which unequivocally indicates that any and all special education fund collections must be at such rate.

Question 16

Additional Ad Valorem Tax on Idle Lands

Answer 16

A province or city or a municipality within the Metro Manila area may levy an annual tax on idle lands at the rate not exceeding 5% of the assessed value of the property which shall be in addition to the basic real property tax. (Sec. 236, LGC)

Question 17

May local governments impose an annual
realty tax in addition to the basic real property
tax on idle or vacant lots located in residential
subdivisions within their respective territorial
jurisdictions? (2000 BAR)

Answer 17

Not all LGUs may do so. Only provinces, cities, and
municipalities within the Metro Manila area (Sec.
232, LGC) may impose an ad valorem tax not
exceeding five percent (5%) of the assessed value
(Sec. 236, LGC) of idle or vacant residential lots in a
subdivision, duly approved by proper authorities
regardless of area. (Sec. 237, LGC)

Question 18

A city outside of Metro Manila plans to enact
an ordinance that will impose a special levy on
idle lands located in residential subdivisions
within its territorial jurisdiction in addition to
the basic real property tax. If the lot owners of a
subdivision located in the said city seeks your
legal advice on the matter, what would your
advice be? Discuss. (2005 BAR)

Answer 18

I would advise the lot owners that a city, even if it
is outside Metro Manila, may levy an annual tax on
idle lands at the rate not exceeding five percent
(5%) of the assessed value of the property which
shall be in addition to the basic real property tax.
(Sec. 236, LGC) I would likewise advise them that the levy may apply to residential lots, regardless of land area, in subdivisions duly approved by proper
authorities, the ownership of which has been
transferred to individual owners who shall be liable for the additional tax. (Sec. 237, LGC)

Finally, I would advise them to construct or place
improvements on their idle lands by making
valuable additions to the property or ameliorations in the land’s conditions so the lands would not be considered as idle. (Sec. 199(m), LGC) In this manner their properties would not be subject to the ad valorem tax on idle lands.

Question 19

Who are exempted from real property tax?

Answer 19

1. Real property owned by the Republic of the
   Philippines or any of its political subdivisions
   except when the beneficial use thereof has been
   granted for consideration or otherwise to a
   taxable person. (Testate Estate of C.T. Lim v. City
   of Manila, G.R. No. 90639, 21 Feb. 1990)
2. Charitable institutions, churches, parsonages, or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques,
   non-profit or religious cemeteries, and all lands,
   buildings, and improvements actually, directly
   and exclusively used for religious, charitable, or
   educational purposes.
3. All machineries and equipment that are
   actually, directly and exclusively used by local
   Water utilities and GOCCs engaged in the supply
   and distribution of water and/or generation
   and transmission of electric power.
4. All real property owned by duly registered
   Cooperatives as provided for under R.A. No.
   6938.
5. Machinery and equipment used for Pollution
   control and environmental protection. (Sec.
   234, LGC)

Question 20

City R owns a piece of land which it leased to
V Corp. In turn, V Corp. constructed a public
market thereon and leased the stalls to vendors
and small storeowners. The City Assessor then
issued a Notice of Assessment against V Corp. for
the payment of real property taxes (RPT)
accruing on the public market building, as well
as on the land where the said market stands. Is
the City Assessor correct in including the land in
its assessment of RPT against V Corp., even if the same is owned by City R? Explain. (2019 BAR)

Answer 20

YES. Under Sec. 234 of the Local Government
Code, real property owned by the Republic of the
Philippines or any of its political subdivision is
exempt from payment of real property tax except
when the beneficial use thereof has been granted,
for consideration or otherwise, to a taxable person
or entity.

Question 21

Are the transformers, electric posts,
transmission lines, insulators, and electric
meters of MERALCO exempt from real property
taxes?

Answer 21

NO. The transformers, electric posts,
transmission lines, insulators, and electric meters of
MERALCO are no longer exempted from real
property tax based on its franchise and may qualify
as “machinery” subject to real property tax under
the LGC. MERALCO is a public utility engaged in
electric distribution, and its transformers, electric
posts, transmission lines, insulators, and electric
meters constitute the physical facilities through
which MERALCO delivers electricity to its
consumers. Each may be considered as one or more
of the following: a “machine,” “equipment,”
“contrivance,” “instrument,” “appliance,”
“apparatus,” or “installation.”
Under Sec. 199(o) of the LGC, machinery, to be
deemed real property subject to real property tax,
need no longer be annexed to the land or building as
these “may or may not be attached, permanently or
temporarily to the real property,” and in fact, such
machinery may even be “mobile.”

Question 22

Is PEZA a government instrumentality or a
GOCC? Is it exempt from real property taxation?

Answer 22

PEZA IS AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF THE
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. Thus, it cannot be
taxed by LGUs. Instrumentality is “any agency of the National Government, not integrated within the department framework, vested with special
functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if not all corporate powers, administering special funds, and enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a charter.” Examples of instrumentalities of the national government are the MIAA, Philippine Fisheries Development Authority, GSIS, and Philippine Reclamation Authority. These entities are not integrated within the department framework but are nevertheless vested with special functions to carry out a declared policy of the national government.

Question 23

Group of Tibetan monks approached A and
offered to lease the building in order to use it as
a venue for their Buddhist rituals and
ceremonies. A accepted the rental of P1 million
for the whole year. The following year, the City
Assessor issued an assessment against A for
non-payment of real property taxes. Is the
assessor justified in assessing A’s deficiency real property taxes? Explain. (2010 BAR)

Answer 23

NO. The property is exempt from real property
tax by virtue of the beneficial use thereof by the
Tibetan monks for their religious rituals and
ceremonies. A property that is actually, directly and exclusively used for religious purposes is exempt from real property tax. The test of exemption from the tax is not ownership but the beneficial use of the property.

Question 24

The Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA)
resolutely argues that the improvements such
as, carriageways, passenger terminal stations
and similar structures are not of its properties
but of the government-owned national roads to
which they are immovably attached. Thus, they
are not taxable as improvements under the Real
Property Tax Code. It contends that to impose a
tax on the carriageways and terminal stations
would be to impose taxes on public roads. Are
the LRT improvements subject to real property
tax?

Answer 24

YES. While it is true that carriageways and
terminal stations are anchored, at certain points, on public roads, said improvements do not form part of the public roads since the former are constructed over the latter in such a way that the flow of vehicular traffic would not be impaired. These carriageways and terminals serve a function
different from the public roads. The carriageways
are part and parcel of the LRT system while the
terminal stations are not open to use by the general public. The carriageways are accessible only to the LRT trains, while the terminal stations have been built for the convenience of LRTA itself and its customers who pay the required fare. Even granting that the national government owns the
carriageways and terminal stations, the property is
not exempt because their beneficial use has been
granted to LRTA which is a taxable entity. (LRTA v.
CBAA, G.R. No. 127316, 12 Oct. 2000)

Question 25

MWSS claims that it is an instrumentality of
the Republic; thus, its real properties should be
exempt from real property tax. Is the contention
of MWSS correct?

Answer 25

YES. After the promulgation of Manila
International Airport Authority, then President
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued E.O. No. 596, which recognized the Court’s categorization of
“government instrumentalities vested with
corporate powers.” Under Sec. 2 of E.O. No. 596,
MWSS is categorized with other government
agencies that were found to be exempt from the
payment of real property taxes. Also, in 2011,
Congress passed R.A. No. 10149 or the GOCC
Governance Act of 2011, which adopted the same
categorization and explicitly lists petitioner
together with the other government agencies that
were previously held by the Court to be exempt
from the payment of real property taxes. (MWSS v.
Local Government of Quezon City, G.R. No. 194388, 07
Nov. 2018)

Question 26

The real property of Mr. and Mrs. Angeles,
situated in a commercial area in front of the
public market, was declared in their Tax
Declaration as residential because it had been
used by them as their family residence from the
time of its construction in 1990. However, since
January 1997, when the spouses left for the
United States to stay there permanently with
their children, the property has been rented to a
single proprietor engaged in the sale of
appliances and agri-products. The Provincial
Assessor reclassified the property as
commercial for tax purposes starting January
1998. Mr. and Mrs. Angeles appealed to the Local
Board of Assessment Appeals, contending that
the Tax Declaration previously classifying their
property as residential is binding. How should
the appeal be decided? (2002 BAR)

Answer 26

: The appeal should be decided against Mr. and
Mrs. Angeles. The law focuses on the actual use of
the property for classification, valuation and
assessment purposes regardless of ownership. Real
property shall be classified, valued, and assessed onthe basis of its actual use regardless of where
located, whoever owns it, and whoever uses it”.(Sec.
217, LGC)

Question 27

The Philippine-British Association, Inc.
(Association) is a non-stock, non-profit
organization which owns the St. Michael’s
Hospital (Hospital) Sec. 216 in relation to Sec.
215 of the LGC classifies all lands, buildings and
other improvements thereon actually, directly,
and exclusively used for hospitals as “special.” A
special classification prescribes a lower
assessment than a commercial classification.
Within the premises of the Hospital, the
Association constructed the St. Michael’s
Medical Arts Center (Center) which will house
medical practitioners who will lease the spaces
therein for their clinics at prescribed rental
rates. The doctors who treat the patients
confined in the Hospital are accredited by the
Association.
The City Assessor classified the Center as
“commercial” instead of “special” on the ground
that the Hospital owner gets income from the
lease of its spaces to doctors who also entertain
out-patients. Is the City Assessor correct in
classifying the Center as “commercial?” Explain.
(2016 BAR)

Answer 27

NO. The City Assessor is not correct in classifying
the Center as “commercial”. The fact alone that the
separate St. Michael’s Medical Arts Center will
house medical practitioners who shall treat the
patients confined in the Hospital and are accredited by the Association takes away the said Medical Arts Center from being categorized as “commercial” since a tertiary hospital is required by law to have a pool of physicians who comprise the requiredmmedical departments in various medical fields. (CitymAssessor of Cebu City v. Association of Benevola de Cebu, Inc., G.R. No. 152904, 08 June 2007)

Question 28

Classification, Appraisal, and Assessment of Real
Property by the Provincial, City, or Municipal
Assessor or his Duly Authorized Deputy: (1st-GR)

Answer 28

1. Real property is declared and listed for taxation
   purposes for the 1st time;
2. There is an ongoing General revision of
   property classification and assessment; or
3. A Request is made by the person in whose name
   the property is declared assessor shall make a
   classification, appraisal and assessment or
   taxpayer’s valuation. (Sec. 220, LGC)

Question 29

: XYZ Company is an Ecozone Export Enterprise
registered with the Philippine Economic Zone
Authority (PEZA) It started its operations in
October 2014 and enjoys a four-year income tax
holiday (ITH) which will expire on 30 September
2018, after which it shall become subject to the
5% gross income tax (GIT), in lieu of all national
and local taxes.
For fiscal year 2018, XYZ Company paid in
advance its RPT. However, it paid under protest
the RPT for the fourth quarter of FY 2018
claiming that by that time, XYZ Company is
already under the GIT tax incentive.
Is XYZ Company subject to RPT for the fourth
quarter of 2018?

Answer 29

: YES. The RPT for any year shall accrue on the first
day of January from the start of the commercial
operation (e.g., January of every year) and not on the
date of the start of its commercial operation (e.g.,
October 2014) While it may be true that the 5% GIT
incentive shall be applied to XYZ Company at the
time of expiration of its ITH, it cannot, however,
apply to RPT since its accrual begins on the first day
of January on the year following its operation. Hence
for RPT purposes, the GIT incentive claimed by XYZ
Company. will be applied in January 2019 and not
on the fourth quarter of FY 2018. Thus, XYZCompany. is subject to RPT for the whole year of
2018. (BLGF Opinion, 11 July 2017)

Question 30

Quezon City published on 30 January 2006 a
list of delinquent real property taxpayers in 2
newspapers of general circulation and posted
this in the main lobby of the City Hall. The notice
requires all owners of real properties in the list
to pay the real property tax due within 30 days
from the date of publication, otherwise the
properties listed shall be sold at public auction.
Joachin is one of those named in the list. He
purchased a real property in 1996 but failed to
register the document of sale with the register of
Deeds and secure a new real property tax
declaration in his name. He alleged that the
auction sale of his property is void for lack of due
process considering that the City Treasurer did
not send him personal notice. For his part, the
City Treasurer maintains that the publication
and posting of notice are sufficient compliance
with the requirements of the law.
a. If you were the judge, how will you resolve
this issue?
b. Assuming Joachin is a registered owner, will
your answer be the same? (2006 BAR)

Answer 30

a. I will resolve the issue in favor of Joachin. In
auction sales of property for tax delinquency,
notice to delinquent landowners and to the
public in general is an essential and
indispensable requirement of law, the nonfulfillment of which vitiates the same. (Tiongco
v. Phil. Veterans Bank, G.R. No. 82782, 05 Aug.
1992)
The failure to give notice to the right person i.e.,
the real owner, will render an auction sale void.
(Tan v. Bantegui, G.R. No. 154027, 24 Oct. 2005;
City Treasurer of Quezon City v. CA, G.R. No.
120974, 22 Dec. 1997)
b. YES. The law requires that a notice of the
auction sale must be properly sent to Joachin
and not merely through publication. (Tan v.
Bantegui, G.R. No, 154027, 24 Oct. 2005; Estate of
Mercedes Jacob v. CA, G.R. No. 120435, 22 Dec.
1997)

Question 31

Madam X owns real property in Caloocan City.
On 1 July 2014, she received a notice of
assessment from the City Assessor, informing
her of a deficiency tax on her property. She
wants to contest the assessment.
a. What are the administrative remedies
available to Madam X in order to contest the
assessment and their respective prescriptive periods?
b. May Madam X refuse to pay the deficiency
tax assessment during the pendency of her
appeal? (2014 BAR)

Answer 31

a. The administrative remedies available to
Madam X to contest the assessment and their
respective prescriptive periods are as follows:

1. Pay the deficiency real property tax under
   protest (Sec. 252, LGC);
2. File the protest with the local treasurer –
   The protest in writing muse be filed within
   30 days from payment of the tax to the
   provincial, city, or municipal treasurer, in
   the case of a municipality within
   Metropolitan Manila Area, who shall decide
   the protest within 60 days from receipt
   (Sec. 252, LGC);
3. Appeal to the LBAA – If protest is denied or
   upon the lapse of the 60-day period for the
   treasurer to decide, the taxpayer may
   appeal to the LBAA within 60 days and the
   case decided within 120 days; and (Sec. 226
   & 229, LGC)
4. Appeal to the CBAA – If not satisfied with
   the decision of the LBAA, appeal to the
   CBAA within 30 days from receipt of a copy
   of the decision. (Sec. 229(c), LGC)

b. NO. The payment of the deficiency tax is a
condition before she can protest the deficiency
assessment. It is the decision on the protest or
inaction thereon that gives her the right to
appeal. This means that she cannot refuse to
pay the deficiency tax assessment during the
pendency of the appeal because it is the
payment itself which gives rise to the remedy.
The law provides that no protest (which is the
beginning of the disputation process) shall be
entertained unless the taxpayer first pays the
tax. (Sec. 252, LGC)

Question 32

The Province of Quezon assessed Mirant
Pagbilao Corporation (Mirant) for unpaid real
property taxes. Napocor, which entered into a
Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) Agreement with
Mirant, protested the assessment before the
Local Board of Assessment Appeals (LBAA), claiming entitlement to the tax exemptions
provided under Sec. 234 of the Local
Government Code (LGC) The real property taxes
assessed were not paid prior to the protest. The
LBAA dismissed Napocor’s petition for
exemption for its failure to comply with Sec. 252
of the LGC requiring payment of the assailed tax
before any protest can be made. The Central
Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA) ultimately
dismissed Napocor’s appeal for failure to meet
the requirements for tax exemption; however,
the CBAA agreed with Napocor’s position that
the protest contemplated in Sec. 252(a) is
applicable only when the taxpayer is
questioning the reasonableness or
excessiveness of an assessment. The CBAA ruled
that the requirement of payment prior to
protest does not apply where the legality of the
assessment is put in issue on account of the
taxpayer’s claim that it is exempt from tax. The
CTA en banc agreed with the CBAA’s discussion.
a. If the taxpayer claims that the property is
exempt from real property tax, is the
taxpayer required to pay the tax pursuant to
Sec. 252?
b. Is Napocor’s action before the LBAA
prematurely filed?

Answer 32

a. YES. By claiming exemption from realty
taxation, NAPOCOR is simply raising a question
of the correctness of the assessment. As such,
the real property tax must be paid prior to the
making of a protest. On the other hand, if the
taxpayer is questioning the authority of the
local assessor to assess real property taxes, it is
not necessary to pay the real property tax prior
to the protest. A claim for tax exemption,
whether full or partial, does not question the
authority of local assessor to assess real
property tax.
b. YES. It was an ill-advised move for NAPOCOR to
directly file an appeal with the LBAA under Sec.
226 without first paying the tax as required
under Sec. 252. Secs. 252 and 226 providesuccessive administrative remedies to a
taxpayer who questions the correctness of an
assessment. Sec. 226, in declaring that “any
owner or person having legal interest in the
property who is not satisfied with the action of
the provincial, city, or municipal assessor in the
assessment of his property may appeal to the
Board of Assessment Appeals,” should be read
in conjunction with Sec. 252(d), which states
that in the event that the protest is denied, the
taxpayer may avail of the remedies as provided
for in Chapter 3, Title II, Book II of the LGC
(Chapter 3 refers to Assessment Appeals, which
includes Secs. 226 to 231). The “action” referred
to in Sec. 226 (in relation to a protest of real
property tax assessment) thus refers to the
local assessor’s act of denying the protest filed
pursuant to Sec. 252. Without the action of the
local assessor, the appellate authority of the
LBAA cannot be invoked. NAPOCOR’s action
before the LBAA was thus prematurely filed
(NAPOCOR v. Province of Quezon, G.R. No.
171586, 25 Jan. 2010)

Question 33

ABC, Inc. owns a 950-square meter
commercial lot in Quezon City. It received a
notice of assessment from the City Assessor,
subjecting the property to real property taxes
(RPT) Believing the assessment was erroneous,
ABC, Inc. filed a protest with the City Treasurer.
However, for failure to pay the RPT, the City
Treasurer dismissed the protest.
a. Was the City Treasurer correct in dismissing
ABC, Inc.’s protest?
b. Assuming that ABC, Inc. decides to appeal
the dismissal, where should the appeal be
filed? (2019 BAR)

Answer 33

YES. The City Treasurer was correct in
dismissing ABC Inc.’s protest. No protest shall
be entertained unless the taxpayer first pays
the tax, in which the words “paid under protest”
shall be annotated on the tax receipts. Here,
ABC, Inc. failed to first pay the real property tax
assessed by the Quezon City when it filed a
protest before the City Treasurer. (Sec. 252,
LGC)
b. Assuming that ABC, Inc. decides to appeal the
dismissal, the appeal should be filed with theLocal Board of Assessment Appeals (LBAA). If
the local treasurer denies the protest or fails to
act upon it within the 60-day period, the
taxpayer/real property owner may then appeal
or directly file a verified petition with the LBAA
within 60 days from denial of the protest or
receipt of the notice of assessment. (Secs. 226 &
252, LGC)

Question 34

: In view of the street widening and cementing
of roads and improvement of drainage and
sewers in the district of Ermita, the City Council
of the City of Manila passed an ordinance
imposing and collecting a special levy on lands
in the district. Jose filed a protest against the
special levy fifteen (15) days after the last
publication of the ordinance alleging that the
maximum rate 60% of actual cost of the project
allowed under Sec. 240 of the LGC was exceeded.
Assuming that Jose Reyes is able to prove that
the rate of special levy is more than the
aforesaid percentage limitation, will his protest
prosper? (1991 BAR)

Answer 34

NO. His basis for the protest was the
unreasonably excessive payment. Payment under
protest is thus an administrative precondition for
the suit.

Question 35

A Co., a Philippine corporation, is the owner
of machinery, equipment and fixtures located at
its plant in Muntinlupa City. The City Assessor
characterized all these properties as real
properties subject to the real property tax. A Co.
appealed the matter to the Muntinlupa Board of
Assessment Appeals. The Board ruled in favor of
the City. A Co. brought a petition for review
before the CTA to appeal the decision of the City
Board of Assessment Appeals. Is the Petition for
Review proper? Explain. (1999 BAR)

Answer 35

NO. The CTA’s devoid of jurisdiction to entertain
appeals from the decision of the City Board of
Assessment Appeals. Said decision is instead
appealable to the Central Board of Assessment
Appeals, which under the LGC, has appellate
jurisdiction over decisions of LBAA. (Caltex Phils. v.
CBAA, G.R. No. L50466, 31 May 1982)

Answer 36

bonus