COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE VS. LA FLOR DELA ISABELA, INC.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Court ofTax Appeals QUEZON CITY En Bane COMMISSIONER OF CTA EB CASE NO. 1006 (CTA CASE NO. 8132) INTERNAL REVENUE, Present: Petitioner, -versus- Del Rosario, P.]. Castaneda, Jr., Bautista, Uy, Casanova, Fa bon-Victorino, Mindaro-Grulla, Cotangco-Manalastas, and Ringpis-Liban, JJ. LA FLOR DELA ISABELA, INC., Promulgated: Respondent. MAY 11 ~ii X -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~---r;~/0~:.~X RES 0 L UTI 0 ~v BAUTISTA,]: This resolves petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration," filed on December 3, 2014, with respondent's "Comment (To Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration dated 1 December 2014)," filed on April6, 2015. On November 10, 2014, the Court En Bane promulgated a Decision, the dispositive portion of which states: "WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition for Review is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. Accordingly, the Assailed Decision dated March 25, 201~

RESOLUTION CTA EB CASE NO. 1006 (CTA Case No. 8132) Page2 of4 and the Assailed Resolution dated March 22, 2013 are hereby AFFIRMED in toto. SO ORDERED." Petitioner maintains that the parties have stipulated on the issuance of a Preliminary Assessment Notice ("PAN") dated December 15,2004, as well as on the Final Assessment Notice ("FAN") dated January 24, 2015. Furthermore, petitioner alleges that the respondent has not controverted the documents attached to her Answer, therefore, the same are deemed admitted and part of the pleadings pursuant to Sections 7 and 8 of Rule 8 of the Rules of Court. Finally, petitioner insists that respondent received the PAN and the FAN as can be seen from its reply found in Annexes "3," "4," and "7." On the other hand, respondent alleges that while the parties have stipulated on the issuance of a supposed PAN on December 15, 2004 and a supposed FAN on January 24,2005, petitioner has failed to prove that the PAN and the FAN were properly received by respondent or any of its authorized representatives. In addition, respondent maintains that the second Waiver of the Statute of Limitations dated July 21, 2004 is defective since it did not comply with Revenue Memorandum Order No. 20-90, such that, it was not signed by the Commissioner despite the fact that the amount is more than One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) and that there is no stated date of acceptance by the Commissioner or his duly authorized representative. Being defective, the second waiver is null and void and is not binding, thus, it did not extend the period to assess by petitioner. We find no merit in petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration." A perusal of the Motion for Reconsideration shows that the grounds raised therein are mere rehash of her Petition for Review fil~~ / before the Court En Bane, which had already been comprehensiv~

RESOLUTION CTA EB CASE NO. 1006 (CTA Case No. 8132) Page3of4 discussed and passed upon in the assailed Decision dated November 10,2014. To reiterate, a mailed matter is deemed received by the addressee (the respondent) in the regular course of business, however, if the taxpayer denies having received an assessment from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the burden is upon the latter to prove that such notice was indeed received by the taxpayer) As exhaustively discussed by the Court in Division and later on by the Court En Bane, petitioner did not present any evidence to prove that the PAN and the FAN were actually received by respondent. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the "Motion for Reconsideration" is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. WE CONCUR: Presiding Justice Ju~cfC.~~A,JR. If Associate Justice ER~.UY Associate Justice CAESA~SANOVA Assodate Justice 1 Barcelon, Roxas Securities, Inc. (now known as UBP Securities, Inc.) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 157064, August 7, 2006, 498 SCRA 126.

RESOLUTION CTA EB CASE NO. 1006 (CTA Case No. 8132) Page4 o�4 ~ N. ~ .. 6'~ (On Official Business) CIELITO N. MNDARO-GRULLA AMELIA R. COTANGCO-MANALASTAS Associate Justice Associate Justice ~."A ?4~ . _,(�L...._ MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice