MHPUNABIA

RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION v. CIR
DOCTRINE: The jurisdiction of the CTA has been expanded to include not only decisions or rulings but inaction
as well of the CIR. The decisions, rulings, or inaction of the CIR are subject to appeal with the CIR provided
such appeal is filed within 30 days after the receipt of such decision or ruling, or within 30 days after the
expiration of the 180-day period fixed by law for the Commissioner to act on the disputed assessments. This
30-day period within which to file an appeal is jurisdictional and failure to comply therewith would bar the
appeal and deprive the CTA of its jurisdiction. Such period is not merely directory but mandatory.
Tax Remedies – In case the Commissioner fails to act on the disputed assessment within the 180-day period
from date of submission of documents, a taxpayer can either: (options mutually exclusive)
1) file a petition for review with the CTA w/in 30 days after the expiration of the 180-day period; or
2) await the final decision of the Commissioner on the disputed assessments and appeal such final
decision to the CTA within 30 days after receipt of a copy of such decision
FACTS: In 2001, RCBC received a demand letter from the CIR for its tax liabilities -- Gross Onshore Tax and
Documentary Stamp Tax – for its Special Savings Placements for the taxable year 1997. It then filed on July 20,
2001, a letter/request for reconsideration/reinvestigation pursuant to Section 228 of the NIRC. When this was
not acted upon, RCBC filed on April 30, 2002 a petition for review with the CTA for the cancellation of the
assessments.
The issue of CTA’s jurisdiction was decided upon in a Resolution dated Sep 10, 2003 but RCBC’s petition for
review was dismissed because it was filed beyond the 30-day period following the lapse of 180 days from
petitioner’s submission of documents in support of its protest. RCBC did not file a motion for reconsideration
or appeal. The Resolution became final and executor on October 1, 2003 and Entry of Judgment was made on
December 1, 2003.
ISSUE: WN petitioner was denied the opportunity to be heard

-

NO

HELD: Petitioner’s action for the cancellation of its assessments had already prescribed. As provided in Section
228, the failure of a taxpayer to appeal from an assessment on time rendered the assessment final, executory
and demandable.
After availing the first option (filing a petition for review which was however filed out of time) petitioner
cannot successfully resort to the second option (awaiting the final decision of the Commissioner and appealing
the same to CTA) on the pretext that there is yet no final decision on the disputed assessment because of the
Commissioner’s inaction. RCBC’s failure to comply with the 30-day statutory period would bar the appeal and
deprive the CTA of its jurisdiction to entertain and determine the correctness of the assessment.
RCBC is precluded from disputing the correctness of the assessment.