ASTURIAS SUGAR CENTRAL v. CUSTOMS (29 SCRA 617)

Executive Construction

ASTURIAS SUGAR CENTRAL v. CUSTOMS (29 SCRA 617)

FACTS

Asturias Sugar Central, Inc., a domestic company engaged in the production and milling of centrifugal sugar for exert, was using jute bags as container for sugar.

Consequently, the company made two importations of jute bags, both of which entered free of customs duties and special import tax upon the petitioner's filing of Re-exportation and Special Import Tax Bonds, under the condition that the bags shall be exported within 1 year from the date of importation.

However, not all the bags were exported within the 1 year period. Petitioner asked for an extension, but it was denied. The Collector of Customs assessed customs duties and special import tax.

Issues:

 

a.) Whether or not the Commissioner of Customs is vested with discretion to extend the period of one year provided for in section 23 of the Philippine Tariff Act of 1909.

 

b.) Whether or not interpretation or construction of an ambiguous or uncertain statute by the Executive Department or other Administrative Agencies be given consideration?  In the case at bar, the Bureau of Customs.

 

Held:

 

a.) Section 23 of the Philippine Tariff Act Of 1909 and the superseding sec. 105(x) of the Tariff and Customs Code, while fixing at one year the period within which the containers therein mentioned must be exported, are silent as to whether the said period may be extended. By reason of this silence, the Bureau of Customs Issued Administrative Orders 389 and 66 to eliminate confusion and provide a guide as to how it shall apply the law, and, more specifically, to make officially known its policy to consider the one-year period mentioned in the law as non-extendible.

 

b.) Considering that the statutory provisions in question (Section 23 of the Philippine Tariff Act of 1909 and Sec. 105(x) of the Tariff and Customs Code) have not been the subject of previous judicial interpretation, then the application of the doctrine of "judicial respect for administrative construction (in the case at bar the Bureau of Customs issued Administrative Orders 389 and 66 to eliminate confusion and provide a guide as to how it shall apply the law, and, more specifically, to make officially known its policy to consider the one-year period mentioned in the law as non-extendible., " would, initially, be in order.

 

          Only where the court of last resort has not previously interpreted the statute is the rule applicable that courts will give consideration to construction by administrative or executive departments of the state.

 

          The formal or informal interpretation or practical construction of an ambiguous or uncertain statute or law by the executive department or other agency charged with its administration or enforcement is entitled to consideration and the highest respect from the courts, and must be accorded appropriate weight in determining the meaning of the law, especially when the construction or interpretation is long continued and uniform or is contemporaneous with the first workings of the statute, or when the enactment of the statute was suggested by such agency.

 

          Considering that the Bureau of Customs is the office charged with implementing and enforcing the provisions of our Tariff and Customs Code, the construction placed by it thereon should be given controlling weight.

 

          In applying the doctrine or principle of respect for administrative or practical construction, the courts often refer to several factors which may be regarded as bases of the principle, as factors leading the courts to give the principle controlling weight in particular instances, or as independent rules in themselves. These factors are the respect due the governmental agencies charged with administration, their competence, expertness, experience, and informed judgment and the fact that they frequently are the drafters of the law they interpret; that the agency is the one on which the legislature must rely to advise it as to the practical working out of the statute, and practical application of the statute presents the agency with unique opportunity and experiences for discovering deficiencies, inaccuracies, or improvements in the statute.