G.R. No.

168056
ABAKADA GURO PARTY LIST (Formerly AASJAS) OFFICERS SAMSON S.
ALCANTARA and ED VINCENT S. ALBANO, Petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA;
HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE CESAR
PURISIMA; and HONORABLE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
GUILLERMO PARAYNO, JR., Respondent.
FACTS: Before R.A. No. 9337 took effect, petitioners ABAKADA GURO Party List, et
al., filed a petition for prohibition on May 27, 2005 questioning the constitutionality of
Sections 4, 5 and 6 of R.A. No. 9337, amending Sections 106, 107 and 108, respectively,
of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC). Section 4 imposes a 10% VAT on sale of
goods and properties, Section 5 imposes a 10% VAT on importation of goods, and Section
6 imposes a 10% VAT on sale of services and use or lease of properties. These questioned
provisions contain a uniformp ro v is o authorizing the President, upon recommendation
of the Secretary of Finance, to raise the VAT rate to 12%, effective January 1, 2006, after
specified conditions have been satisfied. Petitioners argue that the law is unconstitutional.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not there is a violation of Article VI, Section 24 of the Constitution.
2. Whether or not there is undue delegation of legislative power in violation of Article VI
Sec 28(2) of the Constitution.
3. Whether or not there is a violation of the due process and equal protection under
Article III Sec. 1 of the Constitution.
HELD/RULING:
1. Since there is no question that the revenue bill exclusively originated in the House of
Representatives, the Senate was acting within its constitutional power to introduce
amendments to the House bill when it included provisions in Senate Bill No. 1950
amending corporate income taxes, percentage, and excise and franchise taxes.
2. There is no undue delegation of legislative power but only of the discretion as to the
execution of a law. This is constitutionally permissible. Congress does not abdicate its
functions or unduly delegate power when it describes what job must be done, who must
do it, and what is the scope of his authority; in our complex economy that is frequently
the only way in which the legislative process can go forward.
3. The power of the State to make reasonable and natural classifications for the purposes
of taxation has long been established. Whether it relates to the subject of taxation, the
kind of property, the rates to be levied, or the amounts to be raised, the methods of
assessment, valuation and collection, the States power is entitled to presumption of
validity. As a rule, the judiciary will not interfere with such power absent a clear showing
of unreasonableness, discrimination, or arbitrariness.