HB. (Its ironic however to note that Tolentino and co-petitioner Raul Roco even
signed the said Senate Bill.)
ISSUE: Whether or not the EVAT law is procedurally infirm.
HELD: No. By a 9-6 vote, the Supreme Court rejected the challenge,
In Sec 24, Art 6 of the Constitution Court said that it is not the law which should
originate from the House of Rep, but the revenue bill which was required to
originate from the House of Rep. The inititiative must come from the Lower
House because they are elected in the district level meaning they are expected
to be more sensitive to the needs of the locality.
Also, a bill originating from the Lower House may undergo extensive changes
while in the Senate. Senate can introduce a separate and distinct bill other than
the one the Lower House proposed. The Constitution does not prohibit the filing
in the Senate of a substitute bill in anticipation of its receipt of the House bill, so
long as action by Senate is withheld pending the receipt of the House bill.
Note also that there were several instances before where Senate passed its own
version rather than having the HoR version as far as revenue and other such bills
are concerned. This practice of amendment by substitution has always been
accepted. The proposition of Tolentino concerns a mere matter of form. There is
no showing that it would make a significant difference if Senate were to adopt his
over what has been done.