CTA Case No. 3667 (Decision)

.� REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY JARDINE FLEMING (PHILIPPINES), INC., Petitioner~ -- -- VE~ r s us C.T.A. CASE NO. 3 667 THE ACTING COMMISSIONER OF I NTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.. X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - X DE C I S I 0 N In its letter of July 12~ 1983 to respondent Commissioner- of Inten1al Revenue~ petitioner ,Jardine Fl e ming (Philippin es ) Inc. r-� eque s ted for the re fun d of the amount of P19~798.98 representing income t~x withheld and paid by various withholding ag e nts from its profess ional/advisory fees for ta xable years 1981 and 1982 . Since no action was t a ken seas onably by res ponde nt on its claim for ta x r e fund , pet i t i oner f i led the instant petition fo r r e v .i. e w for- th E�~ s aid amount of Pl9~798.98. 114

�.� DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3667 2 .... The facts are not disputed, respondent having submitted this case for decision on the basis of the pleadings and records after petitioner has presented its evidence. As alleged in the petition for review and admitted by respondent, and bor�ne out by the records: 1. Petitioner is a domestic corporation or-ganized and e:-:isti.ng undE~t- and by vir� tue of tt1e laws of the Philippines, with principal office and place of business at 222 Buendia Avenue, Makati, 1'1e t. t""Cl 1'1an i l a n 2.. F\(�?.~.; ptJnde= n t is the.' dt.t 1 y design a ted and inc umbent Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue of the Philippines duly authorized by law to act on claims for tax refund or credit and on other matte r s involving the enforcement of national in te:}r�na.l revenue with office at the BIR National Office Building, East Tr�� iangle, C:luezon City, where he may be served with summons. 3. For the calendar years 1981 and 1982, pet.i tione:~r- r�ec:e.i ved f I'" Orll various domestic c orporations advi s ory/professional fees �fn:lm which the corr e sponding ta:-: was withheld and duly remitted to the BIR under the Expanded Withholding 115

�.� DECISION CTA CASE NU. 3667 3 Ta:-: System. ( E:-:hibi ts "B-1" ~ "B-2" ~ 11 B-3" ~ "J II~ "K"~ "L.", "1'1", "N", "0", "F'", "Q-1", "Q-2", "Q- 3", and "Y". 4. The amount of advisory/professional fees received by petitioner and the corresponding wit.hhe 1d for� the said calendar years 1981 and 1982 f 0 1 1 CH'\IS : ( II B-1 11 ' 11 8 - 2", 11 8-3", C ~ 111111 C-1 11 , D II II ' II D- 111 ' E II II ' II E -111 ' F II II ' II F- .111 ' G II II ' II G- .111 ' H II II ' II H-111 ' I II II ~ ~~r-.1.~~, ~~.J~~, 11 K 11 ' 11 L II' ''t"l'', ��N'', ''Q'', P II II , R II II , , s II R-- 1 ~~ , T II s -- 1 ~~ u T _ 1 11 , , II II II , II II , II II , II u- 1 ~~ 11 V11 , 11 V-1 11 , 11 tlJ 11 , 11 W-- 1 11 , "X", "X-1", and "Y".) Year- Amount. Ta:-: Withheld ~.nd J::.?id r.;overed 1981 F'165,743.00 F'11,568.00 1982 366 ,; 270. 00 _ 13,15~.!'00 Total F'24,720.00 5 .. The above income payments were duly declared by petitioner as part of its gross income as shown under Schedule 2 of its final annual 1981 and 1982. (E:�:hibits "8 11 , "B-1" ' "B-�2", "B--3", "0", "Q- 1", "(~ - 2 11 , and "Q- 3".) 6. In the c:a 1E~ndar year 1981, petitioner suffered a loss and consequently had no income tax liability against which to apply the available tax For the calendar year 1982, petitioner had 116

�.� DECISION .. CTA CASE NO. 3667 -�� 4� on l y a bl e to ap pl y t h e a mo un t o f P1, 954. 00 <":l.qa .i.n s t i t s i n co me tax li a bilit y as s h o wn in th e retu r n f or l E� <~ vi nq r�� r-? f 1...1 n cl a b 1 F�) a rn n un t of P22,766.00 ( P2 4 ,72 0.00 1('~3~; pj_ ,95 4. 0 0) . ( E :: h .i b .its 8 11 11 11 B --� l II !' 11 B �--�2 11 ' 11 8 -<J II , II P. -- 4 � 11 , "B --5 11 , 11 8 --� 6 11 ' 0 11 11 , , II Q �---- 1 II, llfJ ..'":"..\II fl Q�-<3 1t , " 0 ..--�4 " ' " 0 ---5 11 and 7. Dn .Jul y 1. 9, .1. 9f3~:::, p e t i t i on e r f i l e d with c 1 ai m f o 1�� n:~ fund of ~-'mount of Pl 9,79 8 .9B o nl y out. o f t. h e to ta l r e fundabl e a mount �,-J h.i. c: h sa .i.d ,:.:\ mo unt o f P1 9 , 7 98 . 98 i t \'~ i:~s a bl e t u ,.,.u p p u r �t v~ :l. t h i ncl iv .iclu.a l cE�r-- t .i.fic ati o ns t .l'l(:0 \'-l i thl�l o ldirlq c: on c: E~ r�n ed a nd nu cu r � r � r:~ <::.; p n nd .i. c o p.i. ~-::� s r: :c Jn f i r�rn d tin r1 acco mp a n y ing {F:-: h:i.. h :i.. t:.co '' B '' , 11 F{~��� .1." , 11 E~ ---2 " , 11 8"-6 11 ' 11 0 " , 11 0 --- .l II , 11 0 ---- 2 11 ' 0 -- 3 11 11 11 0 - 4 " ' 11 0 - ~) 11 ' 11 0 -- 6 11 , ' z z. . . d II II C~. f'lII :!. II � ) f.3" TI'H ~ d fTl OL.mt�. of P1 9 , 7 98.98, s ubje ct of th e c l a.im f u r� appl i r:~d a g ai n s; t p et. i t i o1�1 E' l'.. ' ~:; i nc Drn P t: C:\ }< J. i i:\ b i J. i t Y n (E :-: h i b i t s 8 11 11 , 11 8 ---� 1 11 , 11 B�--2 11 !, ~~ n ---::) 11 , 11 8 - �-1.1- 11 , 11 8 �--5 " , 11 8 -- 6", "O","D - .1. 11 , " 0 ---�2 11 , "fl---- 3 " , "0 --� 4 11 , 0 -- 6 11 0 ----~j " !' 11 11 "Z", c"~nd 11 Z- 1 11 . ) , lli

------- w .... �.� DECISION CTA CASE NO. J~ 67 5 9. To date~ respondent ha s not yet granted petitioner's ~ l ai m for a refu nd of the s aid amount of F'l9~79B.98. Hen ce~ t hi s p etitio n fo r review. The lone question t en d ered for resolution is not. pE?t.i t.ionF.:'t-� is f.;?n t.i t 1 ed to a r e fund/t ax credi t of thE.~ a mount of F'.t9~798.98 r�e pr �esenting ovc'!r�pai(j and unapplied cre dit ab l e withh o ld i ng tax on income as of Dece mb e r 3 1~ 1982. Dur-.i.ng the 1981~ petitioner ' s c orporate annua l income t .a!< r ef l e cted a net los s an d that it h ad a tax of F'11~568.00 wh ic h was s hown as refundabl e thereon. ( b) Dt.tr �in(J .1.982~ peti ticmer � s cDr� p or.. ;::~ t.c-> a.n r1u <.' J. income ref l ecte d a net i n come o f F'5,584.00 a nd a A f tE~t�- p e t i t i onE.? r. Sc\:i.d ta;�: due of F'.1., 9~)4 . 00 th e total amount of F' 2 4~ 720.00 .1982 c: t�� e di table ~-.Ji. thhnlclir1g t. h f.�~ n~~fundable t .:�:\fTlOLirl Df F'.11,568.00 which is s h o wn in

.� DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3667 �--� 6 ---� i t <:;, .t9f31 income tax return~ petitioner's 1c1o2 ta.:-: amount of P22~766.00. ( c:: ) Pet. it i onE? r- tln\..,P Ver- 1-'Ja.s only able to ~=; l..tppot-� i::. w.i. t.h .:i..ndiv .i.dual certifications i ssued by wi.thholding agents ( BIR Fcwm o �ff .i.c:i.al the total amount. of Pl9,798.98. ( d ) Con,;!:,:>quen t 1 y only t.he amount of P19,798.98 was claimed as refundable. ( e ) The revenue examiner to whom this claim f n r� I~E~ f l..ln d \-.Ja �;; a~;-;; ignr:?d fo1~ invest ig ;,~. t. .ion T h1:�.~ q Ll�::~~:; t: ion invo l Vf:? d in .in the light of the facts presente d, is far from being one o.:1f f .i.r-�::; t .i.rnpr- r~"; :..:; ic>n. (Phils.), Inc. 3600~ Ma r�c h 30, 1984, this Court, s peaking through .J 1�.1. d g e A 1 f-? :-~ s ustained a taxpayer's claim f u I'" r-r:! fund on t. tl f.'! hi.:~ �::; i :::; c:> f t-_,,, ;-: F" f2 tur-n s an ci B I R For-m 1743 (A gents Certi fic a tion). To quote: 10 Th E~ m ;;~kF' i t c:lear- that t c-~ :-~ F" �'? -1:-. t .l r�n s for the pE:~ti tiot t t'? r.. � <:;:, incnmr:~ qu E! ~:;ti . on ha ve shown h <'~ ~::; not issued any t .=:1:< a b 1 E~ y c~ <..~ r- s .i. r 1 nor-� d i. s pu t.<-:�?d the F.:e ,; p o nden t. d f~ f i C i. E:~l"l C: y

�.� DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3 667 -- 7 - � cor- r�-ec t.ne ~:; s ther~eof. The r-equisi. te s t a tt.�? m c-7~n t. cer �t i f .ic<~ t.ion of the amounts ~...,.i. t~1he 1 d i::lnd d E?d UC tE?d by p~?ti tioner' s c u ~:; tomE-~ t-s thn .1 whi c h t hE~ t- es pond en t co 11 ec: b :?d the ta xes and upon ~>~hi c h tack E?d the c l ,::~ im for refund could �fur�ni s h the ~5 <::\t.is f<':l. cti on of definite r-esolution. F~!?s pond E� nt. points t.o no f act l.l <3. l er�r.. or nor supe r�� fluiti~? s ~>~h:i. c h r!E?�:=d be abridged e xcept for the non creditability of taxes on bank interest payments as earlier pointed o ut. As thus s hown the basis of the c laim is not s hort of s pec ific support in terms of tractable data openly laid and fully disc losed fo r any legitimate analysis, doubt and objection but action t:her�E:~on <:' :\P PE? <.H-s c:ons .i. gnE-~d in a limbo of ling~::-�r�irl!J VE!r��if.i.c ;�~t:..i.on to d ate. We see no r���� E~D. :1on �''l"ld nonp .i.s vou c h sa.fed ~->~hy a simple c ase~ wher�e fact and fabrication are no long er indistinguishable~ should remain cur~ i.ous; 1 y un pE~r��tu r�� t:H:'! d. It. may be r11-::~c E? :;3 <H �y to n~~pr::�a t. what t h .is Cour- t said in ~~~he:\ t ~::; o p l i-:\ i n l y <~ pp J. y to the case at !:Jar�� that~ "But as s hould be e:�:p-?c:t ed~ the action could be maintai n ed on the basis of the pleadings, admission a nd affidavit of the parties wh ic h neither provokes any unsettli.ng questions nor involves material fac tual iss ues genuinely in di s pute. The a dmini s trative mac hinery or process employed on the right to the c laim seems -1.-.o havE~ movf.~d b <::\l'. f?ly at idl.irHJ s peed. To lx: r�f~l<:\t.i.vE�ly qu:i.e s cc~ nt fen- ~-;o rne four (4) years on a claim of suc h a s imple nature �::t r�tcl n ot S!J c::nnsicler�able a stake which no longer incites controversy n~r excites a queasy se n se of expectation~ creates but a n unwarranted bureaucra tic: .inertia of :i . n a c t. .i.o n . Re ;;tcl .i.ly a legal c on c lusion can he sdf!~ ly r� � E~achE~cl. F'f.~tition!~?r or any ~;i m i J. ar- J. y c: i r �r:ums tanc e el ta :�( pa yt~r fot-� t.ha t matter d eserves a measure of fair dealing in a more expeditous and competently r �espons i Vf.~ ~:u: t ion. " (Commonwealth Pacific Cun s u.J.tant.<::;~ l.... t.c:l. v. Commissioner� of Internal Revenue, CTA Case No. 2953, May 12 0

�.� DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3667 �- 8 ..... 15~ 1982.) The circumstances obtaining in the case at bar compel us to sustain the tenability of petitioner's right to the refund based on the evidence and pl~.:~adings. And~ in Commonwealth Management and Service Cor��� por �;.I tion '1 '::5. The Commissioner of In ten1a l Revenue, CTA Case No. 3232, June 26~ 1985, this Cour-t he-~ 1 d: "To prov(~~ these �-?:.:cess income.;! ta:.: payments, petitioner presented in evidence its income tax returns for the years involved, the corresponding official r ec eipts for its i ncome tax payments, as well as the various withholding tax c ertificates i s sue d to pe titioner. No controverting eviden c e wa:; presented by r-E:�spnndent.. As a matt:.er� of fact., as s tate d above, res pondent submitted this C: dS E' fo r� dr.;~c :l. <;; :i. on on thf~ haf:;;is of the plea ding s and the record s after petitioner h as presented a nd offer�ed its evidence. Sin CE' n n e-' \��Jho fH. <:'.ys for� judgment on the plf~<:l.::linu s \'!.i t.hut .tt nfff.;!rintJ pt- nof i:'.s to the truth of his allegations, must be ut l ( ] (~'r�<;; toocl t .n h <:tVE�' ;;,,dmitt.E~d the tt- uth of a ll the mate rial and relevant allegations uf the opposing party, and to rest his mo tion for judgment on these allegations t a ken together with such of his own as are a dmitted (Ba u e rmann vs . Casas, 10 Phil. 386; Ev angelista vs . DelaRosa, et. al., 7 6 F' hil . .1..15), n7~�:; pcmd c-mt, ,:\s pointed out IJy p c~t. :l. tion e r�, fTl <':l'/ bP con~;ider- ed as not ques tioned s er�iousl y petitioner's t.o f~nt. .i. t: lE~rnent. .i. t.s c laim for� refund. (p. 86, CTA records). nccmm I 1\!GL Y, r �e s; pon cl en t. Commissioner of i s hen,~by order� E~d to gr-ant. a ta:< 121

.� DECIS ION -- CTA CASE NO. 3 667 -- 9 �- credit to petitioner Jardine Fleming (Ph i lippines ) In c. in the amount of P19,798.98 representing petitioner's overpaid a nd unapplied creditab l e withholding t ax on income as of December, 1982. SO OFWERED. Qu ez o n City, Metro Manila , January 20, 1988. AMANTE FILLER Pr�esid .ing ~J udg e l.JE CONCUR: ..........__ � ROAQUIN Jud~}e z.~ Associa te ,Judge 122.

... .. DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3667 -� 10 --� CE RT I F I CAT I 0 N I hereby certify that thi s decision was reac hed after due cons ultation a mong the members of t he Court of Tax Appeal s in accordance with Section 13, Articl e VIII o f the Constitution. AMANTE F'r�esi.d ing Judge Court of Tax Appeal s