G.R. No. L-5612; October 31, 1953
Sy Man, doing business under the name and style of “United China Import Trading”, petitioner-appellee, vs. Alfredo Jacinto, Commissioner of Customs, and Melecio Fabros, Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila, respondents-appellants.

FACTS

On January 2, 1951, the Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila ordered the seizure of two shipments of textile and sewing machines consigned to petitioner Sy Man. After a hearing, the Collector rendered a decision on June 4, 1951, ordering the release of the textiles upon payment of duties, taxes, and a fine, but declaring the sewing machines forfeited. Sy Man received a copy of this decision on June 27, 1951, and did not appeal. On July 12, 1951, Sy Man’s counsel requested the Collector to execute the decision, arguing it had become final after the 15-day appeal period. The Collector informed counsel that the request had been forwarded to the Commissioner of Customs for guidance, citing a Memorandum Order dated August 18, 1947, which stated that decisions in seizure cases, whether appealed or not, are subject to review by the Insular Collector (Commissioner), and final disposition of goods should not be made pending such review. Sy Man filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus seeking to declare the relevant portion of the Memorandum Order void and to compel the Collector to execute the decision and release the textiles.

ISSUE

Whether the Commissioner of Customs has the authority to review, motu proprio, the decision of a Collector of Customs in a seizure case that was not appealed by the importer within the 15-day period provided by law.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of First Instance. It held that under Section 1380 of the Revised Administrative Code, a decision of the Collector of Customs in a seizure case becomes final and executory not only against the importer but also against the Government if the importer does not appeal to the Commissioner within 15 days from notification. The Commissioner, as head of the Bureau of Customs, has general supervision and control over Collectors, but this does not include the power to review unappealed decisions in seizure cases after they have become final. The Memorandum Order of August 18, 1947, was declared void for lack of approval by the Department Head and proper publication as required by Section 551 of the Revised Administrative Code, and for being inconsistent with the law. The Court ordered the execution of the Collector’s decision dated June 4, 1951.