THERMAPRIME WELL SERVICES, INC., v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (Consolidated with CTA Case No. 9044 and 9232)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION THERMAPRIME WELL CTA CASE Nos. 9033, 9044 SERVICES, INC., & 9232 Petitioner, Members: -versus- DEL ROSARIO, Chairperson, UY, and COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL MINDARO-GRULLA, JJ. REVENUE, Promulgated : Respondent. 171 :/U l COG ,.. X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RESOLUTION For resolution is petitioner's Motion to Withdraw Petition filed on March 21, 20171 without respondent's comment despite due notice as per Records Verification dated April 20, 2017. 2 Records disclose that on April 24, 2015 , petitioner filed a Petition for Review seeking refund of its alleged unutilized input Value-Added Tax ("VAT") for the fourth (4th) quarter of 2012 amounting to Two Million Three Hundred Fifty-Two Thousand Four Hundred Three Pesos and Seventy-Two Centavos (P2,352 ,403.72), which case was docketed as CTA Case No. 9033. On May 14, 2015, petitioner filed a similar Petition for Review covering the third (3rd) quarter of 2012 for the amount of Three Million Two Hundred Seventy-Three Thousand Three Hundred Forty-Eight Pesos and Seventy-Two Centavos (P3,273,348.72), which case was docketed as CTA Case No. 9044. On January 7, 2016, petitioner filed another similar Petition for Review covering the second (2nd) quarter of 2012 for the amount of 1 Motion to Withdraw Petition , CTA Docket, pp . 645-649. 2 CTA Docket, p. 653.

RESOLUTION CTA CASE NO. 9033, 9044 & 9232 Three Million Two Hundred Forty-Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty-Five Pesos and Fifty-Seven Centavos (P3,242,925.57), which case was docketed as CTA Case No. 9232. CTA Case Nos. 9033, 9044 and 9232 were consolidated pursuant to the Court's Resolution dated November 11, 2015 and July 1,2016. In its Motion, petitioner claims that upon further examination of its records and books, it discovered an inadvertent miscalculation in its accounting which, if made known earlier, would have prevented petitioner from filing the consolidated cases. Pursuant to the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals (RRCTA), the Rules of Court shall suppletorily apply to the RRCTA3 and the procedure in the Court En Bane or in Division in original and in appealed cases shall be the same as those in petitions for review and appeals before the Court of Appeals. 4 In this regard, Section 3, Rule 50 of the Rules of Court provides: "RULE 50 DISMISSAL OF APPEAL XXX SEC. 3. Withdrawal of appeal. -An appeal may be withdrawn as of right at any time before the filing of the appellee's brief. Thereafter, the withdrawal may be allowed in the discretion of the court." There being no objection from respondent, there is no reason for the Court not to grant the Motion to Withdraw Petition for Review. By withdrawing its Petition for Review, petitioner is deemed to have accepted the denial decision of respondent in its letter dated March 23, 20155 on its refund claim subject of CTA Case No. 9033, denial Memorandum (decision) received by petitioner on December 8, 2015 on its refund claim subject of CTA Case No. 92326 and the "deemed denial decision" on its administrative claim relating to CTA Case No. 9044 on account of respondent's inaction. 7 3 Section 3, Rule 1 of the RRCTA. 4 Section 1, Rule 7 of the RRCTA. 5 CTA Case No. 9033, Docket, p. 33. 6 CTA Case No. 9232, Docket, p. 70. 7 CTA Case No. 9044, Docket, p. 15.

RESOLUTION CTA CASE NO. 9033, 9044 & 9232 WHEREFORE, the Motion to Withdraw Petition is GRANTED. The consolidated Petitions for Review are DISMISSED and the cases are considered CLOSED and TERMINATED. SO ORDERED. AEsRs~L~~u.stUiYce Presiding Justice r.A6.~ N.M~~.rc~ ~ N. MINDARO-G~ULLA Associate Justice