TRO vs new tax code of Caloocan junked

The Caloocan City regional trial court has junked a petition filed by a private individual seeking to stop implementation of the new tax code of the city.

In a 13-page decision, Caloocan RTC Judge Luisito Sardillo denied the petition for a temporary restraining order (TRO) filed by a Virgilio Gundayao, and, at the same time, declared the same revised revenue code that saw existing taxes increased to certain levels as "valid and constitutional."

The court also ruled that Gundayao lacked the legal capacity to sue as a taxpayer, "a ground for dismissal" (under Section 1, Rule 16 of the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure).

City Mayor Enrico "Recom" Echiverri said the court’s decision was a victory for the people of Caloocan.

"This is victory not so much for your mayor and the city council as for the people of Caloocan. The increased taxes will go back to you as we have always said. We continue to assure you that you will see the taxes you pay to better services and programs that will redound to your well-being and that of the city. Also, we believe that in amending the tax code we denied no one of his rights," Echiverri said.

The mayor also announced that the new tax code has in fact resulted in higher tax collections reaching nearly P1 billion just in the first quarter alone.

"This fact bears me out on this. This show of overwhelming support from our taxpayers indicates that we did right. And so, we thank you for your continued support and trust in our administration," Echiverri said.

The court dismissed the petition filed by Gundayao, who alleged that it was enacted "without nay prior public hearing."

He claimed it was also "beset with unjust, excessive, oppressive and confiscatory rates" and, is likewise, "illegal and unconstitutional." The hiked taxes also deprived the taxpayer of his property without due process, the petitioner alleged.

Echiverri, for his part, said that Gundayao was neither a real property owner nor a businessman in the city, claims he used in arguing his case.

The City Assessor’s Office has certified that he has no real property declared under his name for taxation purposes as of Feb. 15, 2005.

Echiverri also refuted Gundayao’s claim that no public hearings were conducted saying such were posted in conspicuous places in the city. The ordinance was also published in a newspaper of general circulation, the mayor said.

Gundayao also failed to show he would suffer irreparable damage or injury as a result of the implementation of the new code.

The court further said that "it is clear and apparent from the allegations…that the acts complained of do not involve in illegal disbursement of public funds derived from taxation. Hence, pursuant to law and jurisprudence, petitioner lacks the legal capacity to sue as taxpayer."