Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • CIR Vs Asalus - Zamboangena

    Uploaded by

    Jake Castaneda
    11 views1 page
    The CIR assessed additional VAT against Asalus Corp. for underdeclaring sales by over 30% in 2007. The CTA ruled the assessment prescribed as the CIR failed to prove fraud. The Supreme Court held that when underdeclaration exceeds 30%, it presumes a false return, so the CIR need not immediately present evidence of falsity to support the assessment. The substantial underdeclaration itself raises the presumption of a false return.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    CIR vs Asalus_zamboangena.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The CIR assessed additional VAT against Asalus Corp. for underdeclaring sales by over 30% in 2007. The CTA ruled the assessment prescribed as the CIR failed to prove fraud. The Supreme Court held that when underdeclaration exceeds 30%, it presumes a false return, so the CIR need not immediately present evidence of falsity to support the assessment. The substantial underdeclaration itself raises the presumption of a false return.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views1 page

    CIR Vs Asalus - Zamboangena

    Uploaded by

    Jake Castaneda
    The CIR assessed additional VAT against Asalus Corp. for underdeclaring sales by over 30% in 2007. The CTA ruled the assessment prescribed as the CIR failed to prove fraud. The Supreme Court held that when underdeclaration exceeds 30%, it presumes a false return, so the CIR need not immediately present evidence of falsity to support the assessment. The substantial underdeclaration itself raises the presumption of a false return.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    CIR v Asalus Corp.; G.R. No.

    221590; 22 Feb 2011

    Published 01126 March 2019 — in Legal Chyme — by Claudine

    FACTS: Respondent filed before the CPA Division a petition for review of petitioner's Final Decision on
    Disputed Assessment (FDDA) showing deficiency VAT for 2007, where there was a finding of
    underdeclaration of more than 30% of its declared VAT sales. In its 02 April 2014 Decision, the CTA
    Division ruled that the VAT assessment had prescribed and consequently deemed invalid because
    petitioner failed to present evidence regarding its allegation of fraud or falsity in the returns.

    ISSUE(S): Whether or not a false return may be presumed.

    HELD: YES. When there is a showing that a taxpayer has substantially underdeclared its sales, receipts or
    income, there is a presumption that it has filed a false return. As such, the CIR need not immediately
    present evidence to support the falsity of the return, unless the presumption has been overcome.

    You might also like