Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Cir VS Cta and Petron Corp PDF

    Uploaded by

    Mark Joseph Lupango
    352 views3 pages
    The CTA has jurisdiction over this case concerning Petron's challenge of the CIR's classification of alkylate and the resulting imposition of excise tax. The CIR issued a ruling interpreting the tax treatment of alkylate under the NIRC. In response, the COC assessed excise tax on Petron's importation of alkylate. Petron contested this in the CTA. The CIR argued the CTA lacked jurisdiction. However, the CTA and the Supreme Court affirmed the CTA's jurisdiction, as Section 7 of the law establishing the CTA provides it with exclusive appellate jurisdiction over tax-related cases from decisions of agencies like the CIR. The validity of administrative issuances like revenue rulings from the CIR fall under the

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    CIR VS CTA AND PETRON CORP..pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The CTA has jurisdiction over this case concerning Petron's challenge of the CIR's classification of alkylate and the resulting imposition of excise tax. The CIR issued a ruling interpreting the tax treatment of alkylate under the NIRC. In response, the COC assessed excise tax on Petron's importation of alkylate. Petron contested this in the CTA. The CIR argued the CTA lacked jurisdiction. However, the CTA and the Supreme Court affirmed the CTA's jurisdiction, as Section 7 of the law establishing the CTA provides it with exclusive appellate jurisdiction over tax-related cases from decisions of agencies like the CIR. The validity of administrative issuances like revenue rulings from the CIR fall under the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    352 views3 pages

    Cir VS Cta and Petron Corp PDF

    Uploaded by

    Mark Joseph Lupango
    The CTA has jurisdiction over this case concerning Petron's challenge of the CIR's classification of alkylate and the resulting imposition of excise tax. The CIR issued a ruling interpreting the tax treatment of alkylate under the NIRC. In response, the COC assessed excise tax on Petron's importation of alkylate. Petron contested this in the CTA. The CIR argued the CTA lacked jurisdiction. However, the CTA and the Supreme Court affirmed the CTA's jurisdiction, as Section 7 of the law establishing the CTA provides it with exclusive appellate jurisdiction over tax-related cases from decisions of agencies like the CIR. The validity of administrative issuances like revenue rulings from the CIR fall under the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    Case no.

    54
    CIR, petitioner
    Vs.
    CTA and Petron Corp, respondent
    GR No. 207843
    Feb 14, 2018

    FACTS:

    As to TP:

    Respondent Petron filed a petition for review before the CTA, contesting the
    allegedly erroneous classification of alkylate and the resultant imposition
    of excise tax arising from the CIR's interpretation of Section 148(e) of the
    NIRC.

    As to Govt:

    Petitioner Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) issued a


    Letter[6] interpreting Section 148(e) of the National Internal Revenue
    Code[7] (NIRC) and thereby, opining that "alkylate, which is a product of
    distillation similar to naphtha, is subject to tax."[8] In implementation
    thereof, the Commissioner of Customs (COC) issued Customs
    Memorandum Circular (CMC) No. 164-2012. Not long after, and in
    compliance with CMC No. 164-2012, the Collector of Customs assessed
    excise tax on Petron's importation of alkylate.

    On February 13, 2013, the CTA issued the first assailed Resolution.It
    explained that the controversy was not essentially about the
    constitutionality or legality of CMC No. 164-2012 but a question on the
    propriety of the interpretation of Section 148(e) of the NIRC in reference to
    the tax treatment of Petron's alkylate importation, which is within the
    CTA's jurisdiction to review.
    The CIR filed a motion for reconsideration] alleging that the CTA had
    no jurisdiction to take cognizance of a case involving the CIR's exercise of
    interpretative or quasi-legislative functions and that there was yet no final
    decision by the COC that was properly appealable to the CTA.

    ISSUE:
    As to TP:
    WON the CTA has jurisdiction to pass upon the validity of the CIR's
    interpretative ruling on alkylate.

    As to Govt:
    WON the CTA has no jurisdiction over the case.

    RULINGS:

    Yes the CTA has jurisdiction over the case.


    Section 7 of Republic Act No. 1125, as amended, is explicit that, except for
    local taxes, appeals from the decisions of quasi-judicial agencies
    (Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Commissioner of Customs, Secretary
    of Finance, Central Board of Assessment Appeals, Secretary of Trade and
    Industry) on tax-related problems must be brought exclusively to the Court
    of Tax Appeals.

    In other words, within the judicial system, the law intends the
    Court of Tax Appeals to have exclusive jurisdiction to resolve all
    tax problems. Petitions for writs of certiorari against the acts and
    omissions of the said quasi-judicial agencies should thus be filed before the
    Court of Tax Appeals.
    Furthermore, with respect to administrative issuances (revenue orders,
    revenue memorandum circulars, or rulings), these are issued by the
    Commissioner under its power to make rulings or opinions in connection
    with the implementation of the provisions of internal revenue laws. Tax
    rulings, on the other hand, are official positions of the Bureau on inquiries
    of taxpayers who request clarification on certain provisions of the National
    Internal Revenue Code, other tax laws, or their implementing regulations.
    Hence, the determination of the validity of these issuances clearly
    falls within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Court of
    Tax Appeals under Section 7(l) of Republic Act No. 1125, as
    amended, subject to prior review by the Secretary of Finance, as
    required under Republic Act No. 8424.

    You might also like