THE SUPREME Court has upheld an appellate court decision that rejected Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp.’s plea to cite officials of the Bureau of Customs (BoC) in contempt for discussing details of a P7.34-billion tax case in a 2010 press conference.
In a 20-page decision dated April 26 and released to the public on Aug. 3, the tribunal concurred with the Court of Tax Appeals’ (CTA) assertion that the company had not demonstrated that the Customs bureau intended to compromise the integrity of the case.
“To reiterate, there must be sufficient proof beyond reasonable doubt that there was an intention to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice for indirect contempt cases to prosper,” Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen said in the ruling.
Pending the resolution of the company’s deficiency in excise and value-added tax liabilities, the BoC agreed not to seize Pilipinas Shell’s future importations until the case was resolved, provided the latter would post a surety bond for its alleged tax liabilities worth P7.34 billion in unpaid excise taxes and unleaded gas importations from 2004 to 2009.
The CTA approved the agreement and barred the BoC from collecting the taxes.
In 2010, former Customs Commissioner Napoleon L. Morales and other BoC officials held a press conference in Makati where they announced their intention to ask a CTA judge to recuse from the case. This announcement was published in various newspapers.
They requested former CTA Associate Justice Ernesto D. Acosta to withdraw from handling the case due to an alleged conflict of interest stemming from his previous employment with Pilipinas Shell.
Pilipinas Shell argued that the press conference and the BoC’s press statement violated a CTA resolution, which stated that discussing case details with the media would be considered contemptuous.
The company contended that the officials disclosed “material information” pertaining to the pending tax case.
The customs officials defended the press conference, asserting that it aligned with their duty to provide the public with matters of public concern.
The tax tribunal dismissed Pilipinas Shell’s contempt case, citing the company’s inability to prove that officials intended to “malign the dignity” of the court.
“There was no evident proof that there was genuine intent on the part of respondents to malign the Court of Tax Appeals,” it said. “Rather, the statements made were criticism in relation to the actions of the petitioner (Pilipinas Shell), not an attack on the Court of Tax Appeals.” — John Victor D. Ordoñez
