COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. NEW YORK BAY PHILIPPINES, INC.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ENBANC COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB NO. 3062 REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 10628) Petitioner, -versus - MASTERCARD TRANSACTION CTA EB NO. 3066 SERVICES (PHILIPPINES) INC. (CTA Case No. 10628) (FORMERLY, NEW YORK BAY PHILIPPINES, INC.), Present: Respondent. RINGPIS-LIBAN, P.J., )C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )C BACORRO-VILLENA, MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, MASTERCARD TRANSACTION REYES-FAJARDO, SERVICES (PHILIPPINES) INC. CU I-DAVI D , (FORMERLY, NEW YORK BAY PHILIPPINES, INC.), FERRER-FLORES, and Petitioner, ANGE LE S, ]]. - versus- COMMISSIONE R OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. )C- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - )C RESOLUTION RINGPIS-LIBAN, PJ.: This resolves the followinv

RESOLUTION CTA EB Nos. 3062. & 3066 (CTA Case No. 1062.8) Page 2. of 4 1) "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Deczsion promulgated on 18 March 2026r flied by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue ("CIR") on April 08, 2026, with "Comment (re: CIR's Motion for Reconsideration in CTA EB No. 3062)"2 flied by J\Iastercard Transaction Services (Philippines) Inc. ("J\ITSP Inc.") on April29, 2026, praying that the Decision3 promulgated on March 18, 2026 ("Assailed Decision") be reversed and set aside and another one be rendered denying MTSP Inc.'s claim for refund of its excess and unutilized input value-added tax ("VAT") for the four (4) quarters of calendar year 2019; and 2) "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated March 18, 2026)"4 filed by MTSP Inc. on April 08, 2026, with "Ivianifestation" filed by the CIR on "'\pril 30, 2026, seeking to: a. Reverse and set aside the July 11, 2024 Decision and December 27, 2024 Resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals ("CTA") Third Division in CTA Case No. 10628, insofar as it denied Petitioner's claim for refund in the amount ofPhp7,155,551.43; and b. Issue a decision ordering the CIR to refund or issue in favor of MTSP Inc. a tax credit certificate in the amount of Php9,311,595.17 representing its excess and unutilized input V"'\T attributable to its zero- rated sales of service during calendar year 2019. The dispositive portion of the I\ssailed Decision reads: "WHEREFORE, the instant Petitions for Review filed by Mastercard Transactions Services (Philippines) Inc. and the Commissioner oflnternal Revenue are both DENIED for lack of ment. SO ORDERED.'? Rollo, pp. 114-12.9. 2 Id., pp. 147-161. 3 Id., pp. 97-108. 4 Id., pp. 130-139. Id., Decision dated March 18, 2.02.6, p. 107.

RESOLUTION CTA EB Nos. 3062 & 3066 (CTA Case No. 10628) In his motion, the CIR maintains that the law requires that only "creditable input taxes" that are "directly attributable" may be refunded; that MTSP Inc. failed to overcome the burden of proving that the subject input VI\T being claimed remained unutilized or have not been applied against any output VAT for the current and succeeding quarters following the first quarter of calendar year 2020; and that MTSP Inc. fell short of proving the veracity of its claim for refund. On the other hand, i\ITSP Inc. claims in its Motion for Reconsideration that the subject official receipts are valid even though they were antedated to May 2019, because they are duly-registered with the Bureau of Internal Revenue pursuant to Section 238 of the National Internal Revenue Code ("NIRC") of 1997, as amended, under the Authority to Print (ATP) dated June 03,2019 and that there is no basis for the CTA Division's conclusion that the antedating of the subject official receipts will negate the VAT zero-rating of an otherwise zero- rated transaction under Section 108(B) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended. \'Ve resolve to deny both motions for lack of merit. The arguments raised by the CIR and the MTSP Inc. in their motions are mere recapitulation of the arguments they have raised in their respective Petitions for Review filed with this Court, which as We have previously pointed out as also reproduction of their arguments with the Third Division. Moreover, these issues have been amply considered, weighed and resolved in the Assailed Decision. Thus, to discuss anew the explanation of the Court on these matters is superfluity. In sum, the Court En Bane finds no cogent reason to overturn the Assailed Decision dated March 18,2026 which affirmed the Decision dated July 11,2024 and Resolution dated December 27, 2024 of the CTA Third Division. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue's "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision promulgated on 18 i\1.arch 2026)" and Mastercard Transaction Services (Philippines) Inc.'s "i\Iotion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated March 18, 2026)" are DENIED both for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Presiding Justice

RESOLUTION CTA EB Nos. 3062 & 3066 (CTA Case No. 10628) WE CONCUR: ~ ,9-JJ.Jr f. ~ -FaillA~ MARIANi:V6t F. REYES�-FAJARDO Associate Justice !vfunYJJ LANEE S. C;-~A~1D Associate Justice c~�~~~s Associate Justice HENRY~GELES Associate Justice