COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. MISAMIS ORIENTAL II RURAL ELECTRIC SERVICE COOPERATIVE, INC. (MORESCO-II)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ENBANC COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB NO. 2796 REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 10145) Petitioner, Present: -versus- DEL ROSARIO, P.J., MISAMIS ORIENTAL II RURAL RINGPIS-LIBAN, ELECT RIC SERVICE MANAHAN, COOPERATIVE, INC. BACORRO-VILLENA, (MORESCO-II), MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, REYES-FAJARDO, Respondent. CUI-DAVID, FERRER-FLORES, and ANGELES, JJ. )(- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - )( RESOLUTION RINGPIS-LIBAN, .,l: This resolves Petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated 28 February 2025)"1 ("Motion for Reconsideration") ftled on March 18, 2025, with Respondent's "Comment"2 flied on May 28, 2025. Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration prays for the reversal and setting aside of the Court En Bane's Decision3 dated Febtuary 28, 2025; and the rendition of another decision ordering Respondent to pay the total assessed deficiency / 1 Rollo, pp. 100-119. 2 Id., pp. 126-127. 3 Id., pp. 64-76.

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2796 (CTA Case No. 10145) taxes against it in the amount of Php21,354,622.81 for taxable year 2015, plus additional interest. The dispositive portion of the Decision promulgated by this Court on February 28, 2025 reads: "WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Review filed with the Court En Bane on September 22, 2023 is DENIED for lack of merit. ~Accordingly, the Decision dated February 28, 2023 and Resolution dated ~August 11, 2023 in CTA Case No. 10145 are AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED."4 In his J\Iotion for Reconsideration, Petitioner contends that for failure by Respondent to justify its claim for tax exemption pursuant to a clear and express grant of a law, it is liable for the assessed deficiency income taxes including the fines and penalties. Petitioner maintains that the supposed permanent income tax exemption of electric cooperatives under Section 39(a)(1) of Presidential Decree ("P.D.") No. 269, as amended, which has been effectively withdrawn by subsequent legislation, was not entirely restored by Fiscal Incentives Review Board ("FIRE") Resolution No. 24-87. On the other hand, Respondent, in its Comment, asserts that Petitioner's motion raises no new matter that \vould warrant a reversal of the .Assailed Decision. Additionally, Respondent points out that Executive Order ("E.O.") No. 93 did not permanently withdraw the tax exemption of National Electrification [\dministration (NEA)-registered electric cooperatives. Assuming it had initially such an effect, the withdrawal was superseded by Republic 1\ct ("R.A.") No. 6938 or the Cooperative Code of the Philippines, and later by R.A No. 10531 of the NEA Reform Act of 2013. Both laws explicitly acknowledged and preserved the legal status and fiscal privileges of electric cooperatives registered under PD No. 269, thereby affirming their continuing tax-exempt status. hnally, Respondent avers that FIRE Resolution No. 24-87, being merely administrative in character cannot repeal or modify the tax exemption expressly granted by statute. \X'e resolve to deny Petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated 28 February 2025)" for lack of merit. I 4 Id., Decision dated February 28, 2025, p. 75.

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2796 (CTA Case No. 10145) The arguments raised by Petitioner in its motion are mere recapitulation of the arguments raised in its Petition for Review flied with this Court. In addition, these issues have been amply considered, weighed and resolved in the Decision promulgated on February 28, 2025. Thus, \'Ve shall not belabor, in this Resolution, to repeat the disquisitions made therein. 1n sum. the Court En Bane finds no cogent reason to overturn the assailed Decision dated February 28, 2025 which affirmed the Decision dated February 28, 2023 and Resolution dated August 11, 2023 of the Special Second Division. WHEREFORE, premises considered, Petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated 28 February 2025)" is DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. ~. ~ _,'---- MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN /\.ssociate Justice WE CONCUR: reiterate my Separat rpinion) ROMAN G. DEL ROSARIO Presiding Justice c~- 1-AL<.........((...,--- (U7ith due respect, I join Presidingji!Jtice Roman G. De! Romrio's Separate Opinion) CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice , ssociate Justice

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2796 (CTA Case No. 10145) MARIARO ~ tfllAC' t ~ .fr4a-..~ MARIAN IViJF. RE-mi-FA]'ARDO Associate Justice LANliLfA'JKAVtAh'itt-rlD;;~VID Associate Justice HENRY ltGELES Associate Justice