Civil Case CEB-35529

1.
 Cebu City filed this petition for declaratory relief with application for a writ of
preliminary injunction against petitioner
 Filed May 2009
 Sought to declare RA 9167 Sec. 14 as unconstitutional on the grounds:
o Violates the basic policy on local autonomy
o Undue limitation of the taxing power of LGUs
o Unduly deprives LGUs of the revenue from the collection of amusement tax
imposed on theatre owners/ operators
o Technical malversation, since revenue from the collections of amusement tax that
would otherwise go to the general fund of the LGU would instead go to a private
entity (producers of the graded films)
3.
 Later…
o Petitioner filed a comment praying for the dismissal of Cebu’s petition
5.
 Later

 Petitioner argued RA 9167 9 is valid and constitutional

 (however, respondent stated that its remittance of the amusement tax
incentive extinguished its obligation to petitioner, and argued that the
case should be dismissed on the ground of litis pendentia)
7.
 Later…
o respondent filed for a motion for leave, aas well as a comment-in-intervention.
Respondent prayed for the judgement on the validity of Sec. 14 and 14 of RA
9167

Civil Case 72238

2.
 Filed by FDCP
 Petitioner sued respondent for the unpaid amount of Php76,836,807 (unpaid amusement tax
incentive reward + 5% charge for every month of delinquency) from Sept 2003 to Nov 2008
4.
 Later…
o Respondent filed a motion to dismiss arguing that petitioner’s complaint merits
dismissal, as the claim has already been extinguished by respondent’s prior payment
of the amusement taxes to Cebu
o Respondent called attention to RA 9167’s IRR which directed petitioner to execute a
MOA on the systems of procedures to be followed for the collection of taxes
 In the apparent absence of such MOA, respondent has been withholding the
taxes and remitting them to the City of Cebu (pursuant to Cebu City’s Tax
ordinance)
 Respondent pointed out that even Cebu’s gov’t recognizes that when it
receives the monthly amusement tax, it is mandated to forward the taxes to
petitioner
6.
 Later…
 however, petitioner pointed out that a MOA is not a needed condition for
valid enforcement of RA 9167
End result: Pasig City RTC issued the assailed order granting to dismiss, holding that the action
before the Cebu RTC is the appropriate vehicle for litigating the issues between parties in Civil Case
72238. The court also found all elements of litis pendentia present and dismissed the complain.