Dear PAO,
My aunt bought a parcel of land, and a corresponding transfer certificate of title was issued to her. For unexplained reasons, the tax declaration of the land in the name of the previous owner was never canceled. She failed to pay the real property tax, and she divulged to me that the notice of auction/warrant was sent to the previous owner as reflected in the tax declaration. The treasurer’s office allegedly informed her that they have no obligation to know the real owner of the property. Is there a violation of the right of my aunt under the circumstances?
Jolas
Dear Jolas,
A real property may be levied for non-payment of tax. The procedure for such levy is provided under Article 258 of Republic Act (RA) 7160 (“Local Government Code of 1991”), which provides that:
Get the latest news
delivered to your inbox
Sign up for The Manila Times newsletters
“After the expiration of the time required to pay the basic real property tax or any other tax levied under this Title, real property subject to such tax may be levied upon through the issuance of a warrant on or before, or simultaneously with, the institution of the civil action for the collection of the delinquent tax. The provincial or city treasurer, or a treasurer of a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area, as the case may be, when issuing a warrant of levy shall prepare a duly authenticated certificate showing the name of the delinquent owner of the property or person having legal interest therein, the description of the property, the amount of the tax due and the interest thereon. The warrant shall operate with the force of a legal execution throughout the province, city or a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area. The warrant shall be mailed to or served upon the delinquent owner of the real property or person having legal interest therein, or in case he is out of the country or cannot be located, the administrator or occupant of the property. At the same time, written notice of the levy with the attached warrant shall be mailed to or served upon the assessor and the Registrar of Deeds of the province, city or municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area where the property is located, who shall annotate the levy on the tax declaration and certificate of title of the property, respectively.”
The notices, which were sent to the previous owner, were not notices to the delinquent owner, as required by law. This finds support in the pronouncement of the Court in the case of The City Government of Antipolo and the City Treasurer of Antipolo vs. Transmix Builders and Construction, Inc. (GR 235484, Aug. 9, 2023), where Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo stated that:
“In ascertaining the identity of the delinquent taxpayer, for purposes of notifying him of his tax delinquency and the prospect of a distraint and auction of his delinquent property, petitioner City Treasurer should not have simply relied on the tax declaration. The property being covered by the Torrens· system, it would have been more prudent for him, which was not difficult to do, to verify from the Office of the Register of Deeds of Quezon City where the property is· situated and as to who the registered owner was at the time the auction· sale was to take place, to determine who the real delinquent taxpayer was within the purview of the third paragraph of Sec. 73. For one who is no longer the lawful owner of the land cannot be considered the “present registered owner” because, apparently, he has already lost interest in the property, hence is not expected to defend the property from the sale at auction. The purpose of PD No. 464 is to collect taxes from the delinquent taxpayer and, logically, one· who is no longer the owner of the property cannot be ·considered the delinquent taxpayer.” (Emphasis supplied)
Applying the above-quoted decision in your situation, the notice of auction/ warrant of levy which was not sent to your aunt, as the delinquent owner, violated her right to due process. As such, she was not able to defend the property from the sale or auction. The previous owner cannot be classified as a “delinquent owner” within the purview of Article 258 of RA 7160.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated on.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]
