Case Name: Compañía de Ferrocarriles de Puerto Rico, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Rafael Buscaglia, Treasurer of Puerto Rico, Defendant and Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
Jurisdiction: Puerto Rico
Decision Date: 1944-02-07
Citations: 63 P.R. 49
Docket Number: No. 8739
Parties: Compañía de Ferrocarriles de Puerto Rico, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Rafael Buscaglia, Treasurer of Puerto Rico, Defendant and Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Puerto Rico Reports
Volume: 63
Pages: 49–50

Head Matter:
Compañía de Ferrocarriles de Puerto Rico, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Rafael Buscaglia, Treasurer of Puerto Rico, Defendant and Appellant.
No. 8739.
Argued November 23, 1943.
Decided February 7, 1944.
M. Rodrigue?. Ramos, Acting Attorney General, and Carmen B. Her-nández, Laiu Clerk, for appellant.- Mariano Acosta Velarde, Federico Acosta Velarde, and Donald R. Dexter for appellee.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Snyder
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellee, after paying under protest excise taxes amounting to $1,365.62 for bringing into Puerto Rico parts and accessories for the. construction and repair of railroad cars, sued for a refund thereof. The district court overruled the demurrer of the Treasurer to the complaint. The Treasurer thereupon asked for entry of a judgment, from which he has appealed.
The controversy heroin involves a simple question -of law. Does paragraph 8 of §16 of the Internal 'Revenue Act of Puerto Ilieo (Act No. 85, Laws of E. B., 1925, as amended by Act No. 158, Laws of P. R., 1941) provide for such a tax'? The reasoning advanced by the Treasurer to sustain an affirmative answer to this question has recently been rejected by this court in a case involving substantially the same problem (Porto Rico Iron Works Inc. v. Treasurer, decided January 25, 1944, 62 P.R.R. 839). It would serve no useful purpose to restate in this case our views as found in the Porto Rico Iron Works Inc. case.
The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.