PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MANUEL NUGUID NIETO (As Proprietor of PERSEUS COMMODITY TRADING) With address at No. 997 A. Bonifacio Avenue, Quezon City (AT LARGE)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY THIRD DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE CTA Criminal Case No. 0-515 Plaintiff, (NP Docket No. XVI-INV-14A-00024) PHILIPPINESI For: Violation of Section 255 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended -versus - (Failure to File Value-Added Tax and Pay Tax) Members: MANUEL NUGUID NIETO, MANAHAN, Chairperson, (As Proprietor of PERSEUS REYES-FAJARDO, and COMMODITY TRADING)) ANGELES, JL. With address at No. 997 A. Bonifacio Avenue, Quezon City (AT LARGE), Accused PSrEoPmu1lsJ.at2e0d2:~ . x ------------------------------- ~ - ~~~~~-~: ----x RESOLUTION On June 18, 2015, an Information was filed against accused Manuel Nuguid Nieto, charging him for violation of Section 255 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended. The accusatory portion of w hich states: That on or about the 15th day of April 2009, in Quezon City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being the sole proprietor of Perseus Commodity Trading with Taxpayer Identification No. 227-942-201- 000, did then and there willfu lly, unlawfully, and feloniously fail to file value-added tax return and pay tax for taxable year 2008, which resulted to value-added tax deficiency in the total amount of Forty Six Million Eight Hundred Eleven Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Seven Pesos and Ninety Centavos (Php46, 811,467.90), inclusive of surch arge and interest as of the time of the fil ing of this complaint, to the damage and prejudice of the government.

RESOLUTION CTA Criminal Case No. 0-515 CONTRARY TO LAW. This case merits dismissal. Section 7(b)(1) of Republic Act (RA) No. 1125, as amended by RA No. 9282, reads: Sec. 7. Jurisdiction. - The CTA shall exercise: b. Jurisdiction over cases involving criminal offenses as herein provided: 1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs: Provided, however, That offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph w here the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than One million pesos (Pl,OOO,OOO.OO) or where there is no specified amount claimed shall be tried by the regular Courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate. ...1 Relatedly, Section 3(b)(1), Rule 42 of the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals (RRCTA)3 clarified that the CTA in Division possesses exclusive original jurisdiction over tax criminal offenses, provided the following conditions concur: first, the offense charged pertains to, among others, violation of the NIRC; and second, the principal amount of taxes and fees claimed, exclusive of charges and penalties is at least Pl,OOO,OOO.OO. In turn, the jurisdiction of a court over a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information. Once it is so show n, the court may validly take cognizance of the case. 4 Boldfacing supplied. 2 SECTION 3. Cnses Within the Jurisdiction of the Court in Divisions. - The Court in Divisions shall exercise: (b) Exclusive jurisdiction over cases involv ing criminal offenses, to wit: I I I (1) Original jurisdiction over all criminal offe nses arising from violations of the National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Cus toms Code and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs, where the principal amount of taxes a nd fees, exclusive of c harges and p enalties, claimed is one million p esos o r m o re; ... Boldfacing supplied . 3 A.M. No. 05-11-07-CTA. 4 Cnbrnl v. Brncnmonte, G.R. No. 233174, Jan uary 23, 2019.

RESOLUTION CTA Criminal Case No. 0 -515 Indeed, the Information charged accused for violation of Section 255 of the NIRC, as amended. Stated therein is that the amount of the alleged value-added tax deficiency due for the taxable year 2008 was P46,811,467.90. Yet, these averments hardly suffice to bestow the Court with jurisdiction over CTA Crim. Case No. 515. The Information failed to expressly state that the amount of ~6,811,467.90, pertaining to the principal amount of taxes and fees, is exclusive of charges and penalties as mandated by Section 7(b)(1) of RA No. 1125, as amended by RA No. 9282, in relation to Section 3(b)(1), Rule 4 of the RRCTA. In sum, the allegations in the prosecution's Information failed to demonstrate the Court's jurisdiction over this case. For this reason, dismissal of CTA Criminal Case No. 0-515 is in order. WHEREFORE, CTA Criminal Case No. 0-515 is withdrawn from the archives and accordingly DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. ~~7-~ CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice ~ 8;_ r. ~ . ~trrA MARIAN IV4 F. REYlf's-FAJA'RDO Associate Justice HENRY S.ttGELES Associate Justice