CTA Case No. EB CRIM-51 (Resolution on MR)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY E NBANC PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CTA EB CRIM NO. 051 (CTA Crim Case No. 0-654) P e titio n e r, Present: DEL ROSARIO, P.J.) CASTANEDA, JR., -versus - UY, RINGPIS-LIBAN, MANAHAN, BACORRO-VILLENA, and MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, JJ MARINA C. BABASA & PEDRO C. CARANDANG, P ro mulg a ted: Respo nden t. :JAN 2 9 2~ X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X j/. '.ryq,--.. RESOLUTION RINGPIS-LIBAN,J.: T his resolves Petitioner's "Mo tion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated March 02, 2020)"1 ("Mo tion for Reco nsideration") ftled o n June 05, 2020, wi thout Resp ondent's comment thereon.2 T he Mo tio n for Reco nsideratio n seeks to set aside the D ecision3 promulgated on March 02, 2020 ("Assailed D ecisio n"), and instead issue a resolution finding probable cause for the issuance of warrants of arrest against the Respond ents. The disp ositive portion o f the Assailed Decision reads: "WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review dated April 19, r 2018 ftled by the People o f the Philippines is DENIED for lack of Rollo, pp . 62-66. 2 Records Verificat ion Report dated November 23, 2020 stating that Respondent fai led to fi le his comment on Petitioner's " Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated March 02, 2020)". 3 Rollo, pp. 49-60.

RESOLUTION CTA EB CRIM CASE NO. 051 (CTA Crim Case No. 0-654) merit. The twin Resolutions dated December 1, 2017 and February 19, 2018, both issued by the Court in Division are AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED."4 It is the bold stance of Petitioner in his Motion for Reconsideration that the documents submitted with the court in Division clearly establish a primafacie case against Respondents for the issuance of warrants of arrest against them. According to Petitioner, from the time Portland Chemicals Corporation ("PCC") flied with the Securities and Exchange Commission its General Information Sheet ("GIS") on April29, 2011, until a copy thereof was secured by Petitioner on May 02, 2015, no new and/or updated GIS was flied which reflected a new President and Treasurer ofPCC other than herein Respondents. Therefore, it may be deduced that Respondents were the President and Treasurer ofPCC at the time of the commission of the crime in 2014. Petitioner's argument must perforce fail. Petitioner's contentions are mere reiterations of the arguments he has raised in his "Petition for Review". Moreover, these issues have been amply considered, weighed and resolved in the Assailed Decision. More so, the argument that Respondents were the officers ofPCC when the alleged crime was committed, is merely a rehash of the earlier disquisition on the issue that was exhaustively addressed already by the Court in Division in its assailed Resolutions dated December 01, 2017 and February 19, 2018. Thus, it will be a useless ritual for the Court to reiterate itself. To discuss anew the explanation of the Court on these matters is superfluity. In sum, the Court En Bane finds no cogent reason to warrant a reconsideration of the Assailed Decision. WHEREFORE, premises considered, Petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated March 02, 2020)" is DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. Q-..r.~ / /. L__ MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice 4 !d., p. 57.

RESOLUTION CTA EB CRIM CASE NO. 051 (CTA Crim case No. 0-654) WE CONCUR: Presiding Justice ~~c a..:t--.,_...04, o__ ERL~P.UY Associate Justice JUANITO C. CASTANEDA/ji. Associate Justice ~�-~ ... CATHERINE ?.MANAHAN JEAN lVIJU\.)<C u ..v n.n.v-VILLENA Associate Justice MARIARO Associate JNstice