Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cta Eb CV 00905 D 2013nov04 Ass PDF
Cta Eb CV 00905 D 2013nov04 Ass PDF
En Bane
The Case
1Rollo, CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853), pp. 7-72, with Annexes.
2Sec. 18. Appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals En Bane. - No civil proceeding involving matters arising under the
National Internal Revenue Code, the Tariff and Customs Code or the Local Government Code shall be
maintained, except as herein provided, until and unless an appeal has been previously filed with the CTA and
disposed of in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
A party adversely affected by a resolution of a Division of the CTA on a motion for reconsideration or
new trial, may file a petition for review with the CT A en bane.
3Rollo, CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853), pp. 35-62; penned by Associate Justice Erlinda P. Uy, with ~
p,.,iding ]w;tioe Eme>to D. Aoo,ta, and A"odate jw;tioe &peca=a R. Fabon-Vioto<ino, oonw.,ing. ~
DECISION
CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853)
Page 2 of 31
Antecedent Facts
Date of Filing
For the First Quarter April 20, 2004
For the Second Quarter July 16, 2004
For the Third Quarter October 18,2004
For the Fourth Quarter January 21, 2005
'II. POLICIES
III. GUIDELINES
SO ORDERED.6
SO ORDERED?
The Issues
Hence, the present Petition for Review where the CIR proffers the
following grounds:
6 Ibid., p. 61.
7 Ibid., p. 69.
DECISION
CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853)
Page 15 of31
8
Ibid., pp. 13-31.
DECISION
CTA EB Case N o. 905 (CTA Case N o. 7853)
Page 16 of 31
The Court En Bane finds the Petition for Review bereft of merit.
r
expiration of the time prescribed in Section 203 for the
assessment of the tax, and after such time, the tax may
still be assessed within the period agreed upon. These
DECISION
CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case N o. 7853)
Page 18 of 31
1
DECISION
CT A EB Case No. 905 (CT A Case No. 7853)
Page 22 of31
as:
y
Thus, while it may be true that the signatory of the
Third Waiver is Romulo L. Aguila, Jr., the OIC-Head
Revenue Executive Assistant for the Large Taxpayers
DECISION
CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853)
Page 27 of 31
In the instant case, CIR failed to substantiate her claim that her
assessment was correct. But rather, she based the correctness of her
assessment on the presumption of regularity of performance of her
duties when she made the assessment. Thus, for failing to present
proof, We cannot subscribe to the CIR's view that the assessment was
valid and correct when CIR relied on another presumption.
9Rollo, pp. 49-61.
10Sec. 3. Disputable p res umptions. - The followin g presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be
contradicted and overcome by other evidence: ~
XXX XXX XXX
(m) That official duty has been regularly performed;
n G.R. No. 136975, March 31, 2005, 454 SCRA 301 .
DECISION
CTAEB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853)
Page 29 of31
Hence, as there was no proof that PDII filed a false return, the
prescriptive period to be applied is the three-year period based on
Section 203 in relation to Section 222(a) of the 1997 NIRC, as amended.
Hence, counting from the dates of the filing of petitioner's tax returns
for taxable year 2004, i.e., on April 15, 2005, for its Annual ITR; and on
April20, 2004, July 16, 2004, October 18, 2004, and January 21, 2005, for
its First, Second, Third, and Fourth Quarterly VAT Returns,
respectively, vis-a-vis the date of receipt of the Formal Letter of
Demand dated March 11, 2008 and an Audit Result/ Assessment
Notices from the BIR on April 17, 2008, the assessment of the subject
taxes were made beyond the said three-year period.
SO ORDERED.
yrl'~rQ
WE CONCUR:
ttl''""'
,..""'~'·.r
~
OSARIO of\
Presiding Justice
Q~c- ~oea~
JtfANITO C. CAST ANED.( JR.
Associate Justice
E~P.UY
Associate Tustice
.,
CAESA~SANOVA
Associate Justice
~ . /1_/._
..,~
~ t:..
MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN
Associate Justice
DECISION
CTA EB Case No. 905 (CTA Case No. 7853)
Page 31 of31
CERTIFICATION
ENBANC
COMMISSIONER OF CTA EB NO. 905
INTERNAL REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 7853)
Petitioner,
Present:
CONCURRING OPINION
such a situation, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the determination
of the Commissioner contained in a deficiency notice disappears.
Hence, the determination by the CTA must rest on all the evidence
introduced and its ultimate determination must find support in credible
evidence." (Emphases supplied)
In view of the foregoing, I vote to deny the petition for review for lack
of merit.
Presiding Justice