The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) has dismissed for lack of jurisdiction the petition filed by an overseas Filipino worker (OFW) against the Bureau of Customs (BOC) which forfeited his luxury vehicle in 2018.
The case started when OFW Allan U. Garcia sought to import his white 2012 Lamborghini Gallardo which was purchased from Mega Star Motors in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
On June 2, 2017, an Authority to Release Imported Goods (ATRIG) was approved by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) for the motor vehicle which was valued at USD68,388 instead of the declared Free on Board (FOB) value of USD62,629.
However, Garcia failed to process his shipment within the reglementary period. This resulted in the shipment being tagged as "abandoned." He then filed a Request for Continuous Processing of Entry on June 29, 2017, which was approved the next day.
Still, Garcia failed to process his shipment within the allotted time. The shipment was once again tagged as "abandoned."
When Garcia made another Request for Continuous Processing sometime in December 2017, it was approved on Jan. 30, 2018. He was then given an assessment notice via Customs electronic to mobile (Customs E2M) for P3,940,093 which he reportedly paid on Feb. 1, 2018.
Lawyer Balmyrson M. Valdez, acting district collector of Manila International Container Port (MICP), issued an Alert Order on Feb. 5, 2018 against the subject vehicle for suspected violations. On Feb. 13, 2018, a Warrant of Seizure and Detention (WSD) against the subject vehicle was issued on the ground that the subject shipment was grossly undervalued and that the invoice submitted to support it was "spurious."
On June 19, 2018, lawyer Vener S. Baquiran, MICP's District Collector, issued an Order declaring that the subject vehicle was forfeited in favor of the government.
Garcia filed a Notice of Appeal on June 24, 2018, which was subsequently denied. He then elevated his case to the CTA on Oct. 18, 2018. The case was received by the court on Nov. 8, 2018.
Upon review, the CTA said that Garcia failed to attach the original or certified true copies of the orders he sought to reverse and set aside. The tax court said the crux of Garcia's case fell on the CTA's jurisdiction over the matter.
"Lack of jurisdiction of the court over an action or the subject matter of an action cannot be cured by the silence, acquiescence, or even by express consent of the parties. If the court has no jurisdiction over the nature of an action, its only jurisdiction is to dismiss the case. The court could not decide the case on the merits," the CTA explained.
"While we are moved by petitioner's plea and understand its plight, we cannot grant the relief it seeks as the foregoing circumstances leave the court without a choice but to dismiss this case," it added.
Associate Justice Lanee S. Cui-David wrote the 16-page decision with the concurrence of Associate Justice Jean Marie A. Bacorro Villena.