CTA Case No. 3705 (Decision)

�.; Y' il!JiL%\lJillL~~ 0 IF H~f! ',l>fllilLU~�~�t!li?'l� ~OUW.T Of TAX ~PPt:.J\l..S QUDltOM CH"'1 H1o.ru::. 'J 1.1 . r-1A; '!lJ Yl�.c, '� P!:;;t:i. t. i.ono r� 11 C0l'11"21:.,S10~JF:f( ~~;f' IJJ'i''�:HLllL F;:E.'IEl�~rr .. l~;" D l.:. C J This is an anneal from the ac~i0n cf the of t.t"': At:lan'~-i.c Gulf and. Pac.tf:ic Conipar:.y.,. Inc~, snrne- t t:'(~�t;i .t e:nent, he wa ,. pa id by tht:: Soc L.l ::ecu.r i t1 Syst.e!li"' I 321

D;;.C.� ICN t.:TJ i~~~~t t ~\~ . j'(()~: � -r�he PLfc.r..,.se:<id ~'3W'1 cecei<.�<'!d ��)v l'JPLitjoner and pences~ {n. 2 , ~l rec .~ �older ! � �~ ,-�n ~Aarch 12.,. 1.9E Z10 resnonden+- r:-ommissj C!l"'r ,-,[ IntenJal H"..v.-~nt.H1 issu,.. ~1 def l c i -"'ncv �1 n<' OP'e ta;.. nc L.tce� \

DECI.SJC'J:J - CT.f, CAS:C.:. NO .. "70'-) "et i~ Gm~ ue~ tetu~n as oLdited p 3, ?.43.,!)() un.:. l.lct"ablE' � d "anct::i.cns and ,:.ddi -c:i nal .. ir~c~ <..~{!l �~: l) t:axt:.s 300 *00 587.,20 (2) ~ss ~iHability (3) ~ss - rnon~ pension 4~020 ,. '70 (1) AGP - LetiremenL 52 ~193~50 {5) G;3H: - di. ~,,'"ll:::-1 1 tt:y _b_180 . 19 Net inc ~m~ pLr in~est~yatlon I"e~ �:.~ P8rFr)n<~l �1n:.; at-'ldit.icnal ek"mol 'on Amount ~1�1 )j e~ct 'L o t �lX Income tdX due ther~on Add: lnLerest 42 mGs- To :{1 Am::Junt DU�"': ;:md Collectible and una'J alcible if not protestea w1t~in 30 days dfter A ril 11~ 1982. cetitioner Liled his lettsr of prntes~. o�'it.hc!l.tt formally act:~n::; on the prot .st of p- t �- ociscilla u . peth:.::ir Mamuyac~ ~ da1ghter. warr~ncs oi dibt 1int and levy tc collect surnxnar ily tht:� ;-)ro -:ested de �ic i.ency Durjng this Mamuyac has been p rma- levy to stlrrrn;:�.r.L.y collect Lhe assessed �tax O~xhs .. c , !. r-Pe 3:;. 3<i C'l'A J:"ec ., ) petitioDer appealed. t.o 323

c; s � Dl.~CJ :ili~U - c~<":i,.~ ~ <;;._ ,.J '8 ; ~ ~ ~~~ 3 '7 - 4- ~. eJf.empt und:.r trh:: yr�ovJ!-.do ns cf Hc ~� u 'lJc Ac t r:o .. 4917 pe t.i�cio;:-~e . ~ G \_;X u~,:; .tncc m:;:; �c: r 197 6- <, nd pray in9 t:he cf distraint and levy issued L~ e~torce c ollec t ion are dence i~ .su )')Crt. \.).f his all ~.,.;qati.cns (Exhs .. A. to 11 -� 3) .. ;:;;�;y ~:dnglt::: AV:i.dc:nce, v.rho Ol)'t.0-:'.l to ano jn fact �-ukhit. t e6 hi~ c~se ~tly ~9ced en the Lecords _nd Lhe p laa di~gs b.1l.ie ..Lng ~hat t;h(-: Js:.)'ue is cnly 1e'-.�1l �)ne . Re s- pondc-:nt did ��ot prencnt c oncrete proof tha�t. tbe letter t t ner s ~r0 te~t~ asserted as the a~~ e~lable dec is ion 324

DEC.L;IOL C'1.',1. CJ'.SE i l ~ 3705 absGnce of proof~ we cannot c0nnid~r d1e alleged �� f or ldck of material evidencP thdt it ~ao received 0 ?hi n i:. e l�~mr.::ntary p.rocedur cf ;-;ur.)::t.unti ve du1:. ;Ycocess., as f.oJ.J.cwr::;! 11;) 'vltH,:ther cr� r:cc t:-ds c.-�ur�t hc~s JUris- dict.::i.on t:c ti."d\e cognizdnC<:: of t:hL> C<'i.<:e; <':led 2o \~hE:Cher (;J.:" net �Lhe ~-~rn(;Unt. c f !"5/.,993 ~ 50 .received by petitioner 1~ 1976 RS retirAment� be:ncf i tr; from the At1.-1. H:ic: Gulf <:'lrd Pac.Lfic Compe.ny is taxabl":: nnd"':r t},.~, y;rov:i ::,J.or. o.?: RrpuGlic Act No~ 4917 . 32ci j

DECI...,ION - CT;"- c.r,:_;t; !~(} � 3 70S - 6 -� that letter dated September 7 1 1982, allegedly den�ying the prot.e:;:;t of pet.i ti, t:. .. r. ReD ')cnC:en t con- r. eluded thdt the aopeal having been tdken on Decemb0r ].ill' 1983., i t i:3 more than a ye,<r f.~:~..m the lE:!Lter- decjsion or September 7, 1982~ On the other hand� petitioner cont8nds otherwise and levy ,iated October 13, 1-:"b3 ancJ pcrscnal.ly issued and served 0n petilicner's daughter8 Purificaclon l4amuyac. on Nov;::mber 2b., 1983., He <.>s.;er�ts that tt t're is no evidence presented by responctent that said letter of September 7a 1982 was ever sent to peti- tioner or his reryresentative or th~t the letter was in fact received by them~ which alleged letter of denial of the protE�st-;il becomes~~' in effect 9 a vo�~ �~ in the factual setting of this case. In the absence of proof of receipt~ we cannot lee;, illy ccLsi.der thE'� alleged letter of respondent as hi: dec~sion on the p.cotest fer lack of that mater ia.l evLlcm ce., 'rhit: is elementary requirement i n substantive due proc~!ss .. Not only that, we see no admission by petiti0ncr~ dr his dapghter r�epresentati Ve t.hc. t. Lhey �ha ve received \ 326

DECl::>ICi, - CTh CASE t.C ~ 3705 - 7- the s2mc .. 1\.nd there being no letter-d~.c1sion or denial of the 9rotest ., it fcllmJs logical.ly that the appeal s~all be taken frcm the rcceiot or service of the warrants of distraint and levy. We are in full agreement with petitioner that t.he issue in t.his case of j ur isdj ction. is., factually and legully. not without precedent. In the absence of a letter-decision of res~ondent# the letter of Seotembcr 7~ 1982 alleged not havln9 been proved by evidence that i t was sent �c r~titioner or his ;1uthor L::ed repre::.;en tn ti ve a.Ld rc:cc. :Lved by th~ l,at t:er.s 1 i ssued and served by r0sponJent on 0AtJtilner 1 s representative. his ctaughter Priscilla u. Mamuyac , on l\Jovernber tt 1983 1 is tant:.ar:tuunt t:.o and :serves j-S .' an outright denial of the peti tic ner ~ ::; requ.est 'f.vr reconsideration {Vicente Hilado vs .. Cornrn.,, CTA., 1256. Feb. 24� 1964) and is proof of the finality of t.he assessr; ent or decision (lo.lgues Inc. t vs" Corrun . , CTA 16201 June 16t 1968 ; Phil . Planters Co,.., Inc., vs., Actg" Cornm<> 4> CTA 1266 ., Nov,. 11 6 1962) becat.u:;;e it is the most. drdstic dcti.on amcn9 a l l media c:f enforcing the cc ll:".ct:i.on of the tax 32 7

l)EC;!~ It.,�.� �t � i-.r, .J,�_, 1 ''.i 'J I J<�. ._� '' 0: I J'/ 'i ( ':r,I. w�J::.r�~ .r-t.rJd.r:�l r:L. c�"'l\ ~~~,.~-~~e J.;c)~~. 3::;';9 11 Vr.~c:, r.J.l.sc1 i.'IIJ.l.:'Re Hit.h )1:'\. :-.r.:.u:JL~~�c tl~c~ t: rhis casf~ v,�aa. dt.:H::r~J Ed c.; t \n (::, 1..1l'1 .. ::.~:~p-~.c ::J..~o.:c 1.;; 1981, ,;;r <.i.'.>;~, t.r:"r r� . � Cc';::i'Vt:d Ul"� lc~(.t.e:J:. �)f 328

DLCl IC!. -� .. 70S CT.r ...~ '\ ..:.;, - 9 �~ .� assc �~:mt�i:lt dated Augu::n:. 31, l ( t,;) � I'i'1is was >rOt.est�.~�J by petiticcle1 1s cLeif c .. aCC(;Unt.-~nt, r.~.yrna Pasct..o, wl;r., rt::<;~U.St8�.:. fer a rccc1s1c..~erd~.icn 1- �.r-. dcc.:-~enldl..~y and 3C:i�":nce ~;tamp t.axe.; en ScotPmber 9 1 1981. Pe~itlcne~ dij nut ~ct any f~rwal den1al l�f i t ; re(aur-~.st fur L� cc r1sidcr t:lon for thE! 197G., anei 1976 2nC: 1 ':J77 preni11m and u.OC'JI7.c:mi...lry and science :.::t.Jm'"l tc1.-<:es# res" .ci� !.ve.ly_. but inst-..:)ao hec i:~uued ayaiw:>t nctJ. t.:.or:er \varrorit t..f d E>Ll...~..l.nt.. on per- soncl propE:rty -HJ::lincot. ;;eLi. t)... cr: ar,d \Jhicb �,;as rE..scived by the 1<:nter :-Jr; }'t:'t'r~:.�ry 24" 198:;. (Anne''� E no 9 1 C'I' r >c,) Tt'lis v:arrant cf di.3t.rr_,int. on ...;,l.S--�Lc..Jl ")r�.Jy'crty is r. .... n~- L'1cu:1t t,('� t.r;e ( ur-.r: j ;h t de r. .i nl of the on+ 1 t.ione;ce s 1~euu �st: f � :::- rt..~C .... !iS ._d.E:r ..d .i c.n (ice< . :_~.; 1-liladc v. Corr.� fl,., CT�� 1.256, Ff>b. 24-. 1.964) and :ts :"'lrocf of r-..r.e firality of th'3 a ~~:oe~.;strr;ut.. or dccisivrJ (Algue,. lr.c .. v~;. Corr:r11. < f lnt. Re�v �~ CI'A Jt.J/.0 1 Jan. 16, 1968; ~~11. PlsnLcrs Co. Inc. vs. Actg. Comm � .-.f I-:1t. Fev .. ~ CPA 1~)C.6, i.Jov., 11, 196}} becau"',e it .is tht.. rr.ost d::---.::tic actlcd amcmg all mec~ia of enfrn�cing the c . .l.lt;ctirn of ~the tax,. (Hahn v., Ccrtr:t., cf lnt., Rev.,. C'J:'J� 1987 * . . .:~ril 30 1 1969 ) '1'his .wnial. of the Cornr,,i~�::� ioner frolil which <J[.Jl)L, l srK;~.ll�'l be �.�_=l-.--~..n�en y "tP,.....�r.""n c, (St _,J � ..:; A'".-., �t1 �""' � .:.) r~:: tc � l 1 ."_".. , .:.J, .......J ~ .... .:.. ~.~. .. , vs. Cell., .QQ� ciio) p,::.._itic..ner h<''Vin� ~ilcd its anp~al on Mc:rch 17, 1981~ only 21 days ot the 30-day ?Criod of 1ppcal wcs concumcd. Henceg we have jur1sdiccion over C'l'A Cede No � 3599 .. Coming nc�..v t~ the issue oi: v;hrther or net Lhe amount of P52 ., 99 3 � 50 received by o._:ti tit-mer as reti ement benefit arising from his campulsory r~tirement due to sickness or physj cal d is;o;bi Lit 1 is taxaLle under Section 12 Renuolic Act No. 4917~ :\t is the position of petitioner that it is exen")tfl \ 328

J)EC~l... ; t. :!~ - C'l'L.:. :.;_ ._ J::J ~ ..<7 (' S - 1.0 - pet..i�t.ione. is not. exer r;t bCC<'"'U''~ UH2l':" Gulf and Pacific Company hds a Dis~biiity ReLire- ment. Bene,- its Plan sutmitted t.o the i:l1H ;i,n conform- E, ':1icam c_,f t1"1e Capitol necUca1 Cent 87: t ~.;ho found \ 330

.. . ' � 1'10 i..,., - 11 - ex .mpt undPr .SE'ct icn l cf Republic. ; c'c �~o.. 4917 "..;L:r; .. 1,. Any J.CC'�.i~,.l )D of. la\v tc, �the c� .rn::.r. .:.t.ry 1 o�t1r' .L tr, E' ta nd i fHJ , t.:i �t... r8tir2ment L~nefit~ rec eived oy effie.! a1~:> 2nd employees of ;-:�riv 1te firm~, 1.1hetlier ind:i vid .:. . , 1 or cc.r-'"JC- ra�te, .in accordar,-::.e 1.;i.t:L a rcasor!dLlc m- �. '. r i v '' te'b'e~i t T) 1 ar~n'Aii1:'61 n cc~ b..:L }ilie"em:"~l:.?..Y.i; r_s h&Lf.;c �c~t:=:r!~p t ~1 ~> a 1 laxe~; iJ.nd ::,h<?ll nc~. bE: llc:..t�.le te: ta I,_ r i:--t_ C~l en �t~{I-z;rn-GEinC" n f ev�~.) -�- - -� __ __ �- �s.e<i;L:...U.ti....'':"2u:-.r!-e."1:-1b�~v cr urh~t�'r a n!:.v......~.._::l:.f~~":o:aE-l~=..~._.5,.-'r=:..-. ~P.:t nrq_seE.>s �,,_>La _to__n_a.v...a,._de_b-t . . . c fficJ_,,, l or uf tll:. ---r-~ ""mpll yPe ccncerneo t _ Lr.e or va .... e Eene-fit -gan cr U'l.3.ta.LI:3Tric;�T:f("1n J T5.'ETITEy ) I nr_;,se7f"Tn rl cr imJi-'ia1 dc�tH n: Pr0V1o.ea:- t.na-t~�Tner-et'".r ing L-fTicT::::.: :1.' r�mpl::)yf)e ha.s been in trH'' :JeJ~'V i.ce C>f the s:.::mc employer. for c:.t le:::ct: ten (10) yt::2rs <md is net less th~ul fifty (50) yecu�;, (,f ac;E� ,,t the tirr:e of hi.s retire!at::nt: ~-rcvi-l.E:'.'d 1 furtb::~re th��t the tcnefJ ts gr. nted unc?,~r t!~.is t\CC ~nn.ll be availed of by r-:n officL1l or employee~ cnlj c.noe. E�c..vided.t....._fi_E:a l;_'l.re.. Tha~ ....;.~,2 case of se~araticn of an oftlcial .�r.....�~Plo_yee fro.L!l.-!;!:!S~.~~i.Y.j ce oL �thl'~ . \ 331

- -- ~~~--~--~-- . ---�� - 12 . . If, 0 ��; '1 t~ ::.�-~'} .:; ..:. .i t J. l, ( 4) f ~�-. ~�.�: ;~_: l S C~ ~_; C �.,. ( ;lJCi i_�r.\ �~ .--............................................_...... ,_,_,_ .'lr.-.....:.....��-~-"'-��--- Jn th~:~ i.n�:;tr'�l,:. C~l ..:(��., \ 33 2

_- � . ...:;., ... ''"'�-- ~.... .. 1 �.:� .... . �:� j,\/~)\-~.'~ 1::�c~l . f~).t~ �. J. .~~t �n t.l'}l~ ~.c:t �: ��,(J~~ L~U})JT~j.. r.t:r.)ti <. t,,,,; \ .. ~ l I ' 333

DECISIO:~ �- CTJ.~ C! .1: ! ' . ~1(1' - 14 - And GSIS di::;abil:ity Lenefit ot , !Uti<. ner�s wife, deduct.i.uns. ThP claimu'i sun. c..,f 1-'300. 00 for.- taxe::-; is much le~:;s t.han ~..rLc:n: �-,nti tioncr had �")a .i d "lS r(::a l ty 1 Cdr regis-:.rati<n fee, dr:iver�s dnc the total sum r f P656. ~r ;rhe other c1aimt>d deouctiC.-cts, tr�E; . d.i.u �'...97 .20 SSS di~�ability nenefitg tr."- ..... ..:. ..... mont.:Lly pension c.f � P"4, 020 � 70, �'3~1d rJ~tJ.t.iu:'lCJ.: 1 5 vJifF..' dis<-f;i l :i t.y l::~t-lOef j t from the G:..:IS in the Gum or :P2,180 1 <1 , ;=.n:: a 11 exca,ryt i t.erns under varj uus ldWS ccvert:.:d by fu)p�l�'l.i.c Acts Nos. 4917 ond 1161 ano Corr.rnenV<TcaltL .~t ~lc1. ]86 (1or S3S �~�r.~d GSl ~: benofi t .s r(:::soec �.j <.ely) , ...;nd L!l< l~r V<>.Cious imn1ementiDg BIP Rulings dn6 RcyJl~ti~n�, 2IR Ruling No. 022, January '30, 1984; Dlh Rul.inu ~.. 'l � 037, I�'eb. 15 1984; BIR Ru1inJ No. 109, JunP .?.1 1 1(184 1 i.�IR t�Wl 'ng No. 207, .LOV. 23, 1983; and l:llt~. Hulings dated M~rch 5 and 14 and J.pri] 10, 197'3 of rr:s~)onc~ nt. Hence� t)tE-se itei,ns are cledt:, tjble frc m grv ; J.r;c. ~ fc..:.. tr1e y ..... ar 1976., \ 334

~;[;,; l �~#; !,., .-.. ..... c: :. : i �t :\x~ r.:~ 1., �Y' Y' ��) .r- ( .t i c� ~: r~ .l' ,G-c~ t.. !';.e. (~-�:. ,__. r t�. J .: ~.. t�. ::. :, c �.1 !i ,. l.l�, J f:V ,1 :---1 ~ .!�t...�. 'rL.J :~,;l>--;::-, ~.3 ,......J~l~' -I;:'J...':.t' . :\ {-''~�.~.',I..1J, '..�-\'�-~��-,..,. .~- . �!,�j.~ .~, - _, .t,~ ._: ~.::;.. ~ ';; l''-�-~. .. .J l. �_ l �.:� \ 335

7 DECJ...,ICt�~ - CTA r;A ;E �JC. <705 - 16 - pet.it.icrH:�r in this instant. ca:--;t;:� il-iHEii.Eli'CI.;>.h., the warran't.s cf disLraint a. d levy or petitioner Ricardo ~ . Mamuyac not li~ble for deficiencY year 1976. No pronouncem~nt as ~~ costs. SCi ORDERl.:;D. Quezon City, Metro V.TE CONCUf~; \ 336