COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. AXIA POWER HOLDINGS PHILIPPINES CORPORATION

Republic of the Philippines COURT OF TAX APPEALS Quezon City En Bane COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB No.1411 REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 8249) Petitioner, -versus- AXIA POWER HOLDINGS PHILIPPINES CORP., Respondent. x-----------------------------------~-------x AXIA POWER HOLDINGS CTA EB No.1416 PHILIPPINES CORPORATION, (CTA Case No. 8249) Petitioner, Present: DEL ROSARIO, P.J., -versus- CASTANEDA, JR., BAUTISTA, UY, CASANOVA, FABON-VICTORINO, MINDARO-GRULLA, RINGPIS-LIBAN, and MANAHAN,U COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL Promulgated: REVENUE, A~R 0 3 2018 ::J;-"' Respondent. X----------- ----- ---- --------------------------------- X RESOLUTION CASANOVA, J.: Submitted for resolution are the following: 6

RESOLUTION CTA EB Nos. 1411 and 1416 (CTA Case No. 8249) 1. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue's (CIR) Motion for Reconsideration1 filed on October 24, 2017, with Axia Power Holdings Philippines Corporation's (Axia) Motion to Admit Attached Comment/Opposition (To CIR's Motion for Reconsideration)2, filed on November 27, 2017; and 2. Axia's Motion for Reconsideration filed on October 27, 2017, sans CIR's Comment, as per Records Verification dated February 8, 2018. Both parties seek reconsideration of this Court's Decision3 promulgated September 28, 2017, the dispositive portion of which reads: "WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petitions for Review are DENIED for lack of merit. The Assailed Decision and Resolution of this Court's Third Division in CTA Case No. 8249 are AFFIRMED in toto. SO ORDERED." In his Motion, CIR argues that the absence of any entry in the "Creditable Tax Withheld" column in Axia's 2008 Annual ITR would mean that no part of the gross income reported therein were ever subjected by the latter to creditable withholding tax. Thus, the supposed income payments from which taxes were withheld cannot be said to have been declared as part of the gross income of Axia in its 2008 ITR. CIR also insists that there was no compliance with the requirements enumerated under Revenue Regulations No. 2-98, as amended by Revenue Regulations No. 2-2006, on account of Axia's failure to present the various payors and withholding agents who can establish and validate the fact of withholding and remittance made. CIR, likewise, argues that Axia failed to present its source documents (official receipts) to prove that the income payments related to the claimed creditable taxes withheld formed part of its taxable gross income in its 2008 Annual Income Tax Return. _g. 1 CTA EB No. 1411, En Bane Rollo, pp. 188-200. 2 Ibid, pp. 214-237. 3 ld., pp. 167-187.

RESOLUTION CTA EB Nos. 1411 and 1416 (CTA Case No. 8249) By way of comment/opposition, Axia argues that the absence of any entry in the "Creditable Tax Withheld" column in its 2008 Annual ITR is not fatal to its claim for refund or issuance of tax credit certificate; that it complied with the requirements enumerated under Revenue Regulations No. 2-98, as amended by Revenue Regulations No. 2-2006; and, that the doctrine of strictissimi juris should be relaxed when it is clear that a claim for tax refund or issuance of tax credit certificate has a legal basis and is sufficiently supported by evidence. On the other hand, it its Motion, Axia argues that the Honorable Court erred in applying the case of Phi/am Asset Management Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue4 (Phi/am Case) and the irrevocability rule in the present cases. We find no valid reason to grant both parties' respective Motions. Perusal of the foregoing arguments, save in the alleged inapplicability of Phi/am Case, reveals that the same are practically mere reiterations of their previous arguments which have been fully addressed and discussed at length by the Court En Bane in the assailed Decision. As regards to alleged inapplicability of Phi/am Case, Axia argues that the factual milieu of the said case is different from the facts of the present case. Accordingly, Philam signified its intention to carry-over its excess tax credit against income tax due for the taxable quarters of the succeeding taxable year, while in the case at bar, Axia has chosen to be issued a tax credit certificate in its 2004 and 2005 Annual Income Tax Returns. However, the Court En Bane notes that the above stated reason cited by Axia was the very same ground raised by it when it questioned the applicability of Axia Power Holdings Philippines Corporation vs. Commissioner ofInternal Revenue5 in its Petition for Review, docketed as CTA EB No. 1416, which have already been passed upon and considered in the assailed Decision. Thus, We reject this argument on the same ground discussed in the challenged Decision. Hence, the CTA En Bane finds no cogent justification to disturb the findings and conclusions spelled out in Our September 28, 2017 Decision.,p- 4 G.R. Nos. 156637/162004, December 14, 2005. 5 CTA Case No. 8092, February 25, 2014.

RESOLUTION CTA EB Nos. 1411 and 1416 (CTA case No. 8249) WHEREFORE, premises considered, CIR and Axia's Motions for Reconsideration are hereby DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. CAESAR~ANOVA Associate Justice WE CONCUR: Ou~..~c~~.<l Presiding Justice )tfANITO c. CASTANEDK,)it LOVEL~R. BAUTISTA Associate Justice Associate Justice .... ER~.UY Associate Justice r.:�.+-w~ M~-C~ (On Lt:Ja'/0J MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN cWtffo N. MINDARO-GRULLA Associate Justice Associate Justice ~'?-~ CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice