... a melting pot for a law students' ideas and understanding on cases discussed and to be discussed in class which are all for educational purposes only.
Any comments, suggestions and recommendations will highly be appreciated.
Case Digest: G.R. No. 78780. July 23, 1987. 152 SCRA 284
David G. Nitafan, Wenceslao M. Polo, and Maximo A. Savellano, Jr., petitioners, vs. Commissioner Of
Internal Revenue and The Financial Officer, Supreme Court Of The Philippines,
Facts: Petitioners, the duly appointed and qualified
Judges presiding over Branches 52, 19 and 53, respectively, of the Regional
Trial Court, National Capital Judicial Region, all with stations in Manila,
seek to prohibit and/or perpetually enjoin respondents, the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue and the Financial Officer of the Supreme Court, from making
any deduction of withholding taxes from their salaries.
Issue: Whether or not members of the Judiciary are
exempt from income taxes.
Ruling: Yes. The Court held that the salaries
of Justices and Judges are properly subject to a general income tax law
applicable to all income earners and that the payment of such income tax by
Justices and Judges does not fall within the constitutional protection against
decrease of their salaries during their continuance in office and the ruling
that "the imposition of income tax upon the salary of judges is a diminution
thereof, and so violates the Constitution" in Perfecto vs. Meer, as affirmed in Endencia vs. David must be declared discarded. The framers of
the fundamental law, as the alter ego of
the people, have expressed in clear and unmistakable terms the meaning and
import of Section 10, Article VIII, of the 1987 Constitution that they have