AECOM PHILIPPINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY SPECIAL THIRD DIVISION AECOM PHILIPPINES, INC., CTA CASE NO. 9239 Petitioner, Members: -versus- FASON-VICTORINO, Acting Chairperson and CO MM ISSIONER OF RINGPIS LIBAN, JJ. INTERNAL REVENUE, Promulgated: Respondent. DECISION FASON- VICTORINO, .}_.: In this Petition for Review1 filed on January 14, 2016, petitioner Aecom Philippines, Inc. prays for the refund of its alleged excess and unutilized creditable withholding tax (CWT) for fiscal year (FY) 2013 in the amount of Thirteen Mil lion Nine Hundred Eighty-Two Thousand Four Hundred Thirty-Three Pesos (P13,982,433.00). THE FACTS Petitioner Aecom Philippines, Inc. is a domestic corporation, with principal office located at 23rd Floor, Fort Legend Towers, 31st Street, Fort Bonifacio Global City, Taguig City. Petitioner is registered with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) with Certificate of Registration No. 1 Vol. 1 Docket, pp. 10-20.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 OCN9RC00003216842 and with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with Company Registration No. A1996- 025093. Per its Amended Articles of Incorporation4, petitioner was established primarily for the following purposes: To engage in the business of providing engineering, consultancy, technical, advisory, construction project management, and environmental impact analysis services as well as implementation and execution of plans, and doing any and all other businesses incidental thereto or connected therewith, and the doing and performing of any and all acts and things necessary, proper or convenient for and incidental to the furtherance and/or implementation of the purposes herein enumerated. According to petitioner, it earns income from the performance of the above-enumerated services to its clients/customers, and a part of its earnings were subjected to creditable withholding tax by its payers/clients. For FY 2013, a portion of petitioner's income was allegedly subjected to 15�/o CWT pursuant to Section 2.57.2(8) of Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 2-98, as amended by RR No. 30-03, while some were subjected to the 2�/o CWT under Sections 2.57.2(E) and 2.57.2(M) of RR No. 2-98. On January 15, 2014, petitioner electronically filed its Annual Income Tax Return 5 (AITR) for FY ended September 30, 2013, and amended6 it on January 15, 2015. In its Final Adjustment Return (FAR) filed on January 15, 2015, petitioner indicated that the tax overpayment of P18,574,811 was "To be refunded"7 � 2 Exhibit "P-3". 3 Exhibit "P-1". 4 Exhibit "P-2. 5 Exhibit "P-4". 6 Exhibit "P-5". 7 Exhibit "P-5".

Decision CTA Case No.9239 On January 13, 2016, petitioner filed an application for tax refund8 with supporting documents, with the Revenue District Office (RDO) No. 44 for its alleged unutilized CWT in the amount of P13,982,433.00. Immediately the day after, or on January 14, 2016, petitioner filed the instant Petition for Review9 before the Court. On February 5, 2016, respondent posted his Answer10 through registered mail, stating that taxes paid and collected are presumed to have been made in accordance with law and implementing regulations, hence, not refundable. Further, petitioner has the burden of showing that it has complied with the provisions of Section 204(C), in relation to Section 229 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, but failed. Petitioner was unable to fully substantiate by proper documents, i.e., sales invoices and official receipts, its claim for refund of its alleged unutilized CWT in the amount of P13,982,433.00 for FY 2013. Further, in a claim for tax refund/credit, taxpayer such as petitioner must prove not only entitlement to the grant of the claim under substantive law, it must also show satisfaction of all documentary and evidentiary requirements for an administrative claim for refund or tax credit. 11 Finally, claims for refund are construed strictly against the claimant, as the same partake the nature of exemption from taxation 12 and as such, they are looked upon with disfavor. 13 After the pre-trial conference14, a Pre-Trial Order was issued on June 20, 201615 � 8 Exhibits "P-13" and "P-14", docket, vol. 2, pp. 662-667 and 668. 9 Docket, vol. 1, pp. 10-24. 10 Docket, vol. 1, pp. 68-72. 11 Atlas Consolidated Mining and Development Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 518 SCRA 12 Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Ledesma, 31 SCRA 95. 13 Western Minolco Corp. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 124 SCRA 121. 14 Minutes of the Hearing, vol. 1 docket, p. 242. 15 Vol. 1 Docket, pp. 276-280.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 During the trial, petitioner presented as its witnesses Ma. Lourdes Lascona, Attorney Clifford Chua and Janis Myrtle P. Delos Reyes. By way of a Judicial Affidavit16, petitioner's Senior Finance Manager, Ma. Lourdes Lascoiia testified that she has been under the employ of petitioner since March 28, 2011 and was promoted to her current position on January 1, 2016. As a Senior Finance Manager, she is in possession of petitioner's corporate records such as its Articles of Incorporation, BIR Certificate of Registration, tax returns, and other documents it filed with the SEC, the BIR and other government agencies. She also ensures that petitioner complies with existing tax laws and regulations, supervises the preparation of its tax returns, including payments and filings thereof, and handles tax issues. Petitioner is registered with the SEC with Company Registration No. A1996-02509 17, as well as with the BIR with BIR Certificate of Registration No. OCN9RC0000321684 and TIN 004-868-770-00018. She opined that petitioner is entitled to a refund of P13,982,433.00, representing its excess and unutilized creditable income taxes withheld for the FY 2013 since it is engaged in the business of providing engineering consultancy, technical advisory, construction project management and environmental impact analysis services, as well as implementation and execution of plans. As such, the professional fees paid to petitioner were subjected to 15�/o CWT, while the services it rendered to clients belonging to Top Twenty Thousand Corporations were subjected to 2�/o CWT. Petitioner's income and the CWTs deducted therefrom were all reported in petitioner's ITR for FY 2013. The said CWTs were not utilized against petitioner's income taxes liability19, hence, it is entitled to its claim for refund. For FY 2013, petitioner utilized its prior year's excess credit of P22,416, 120.00 and a portion of its creditable taxes withheld by its customer in 2013, in the amount of 16 Exhibits "P-65" to "P-65-a". 17 Exhibits "P-1" and "P-2". 18 Exhibit "P-3". 19 Exhibit "P-5".

Decision CTA Case No.9239 P6,401,324.00, against its income tax due of P28,817,444.00 leaving a total of P14,131,115.00 unutilized CWT for FY 2013. In its AITR for 2013, petitioner indicated the option "To be refunded" for its tax overpayment. The witness recalled that the prior year's excess credits indicated in petitioner's AITR for FY 201420 in the amount of P4,443,696.00, was composed of the amount P3,839,671.31 for which petitioner filed a claim for issuance of tax credit certificate (TCC) for 2006, and foreign tax credit of P604,025.00. The said application for issuance of TCC was denied by the Court in Division in the Decision dated October 21, 2011 21 and Resolution dated December 26, 2011 22 due to petitioner's non-submission of the original of its ITR. Such denial was affirmed by the Court En Bane in its Decision dated October 23, 201223 and Resolution dated May 28, 2013 24 . Petitioner's previous business name was Maunsell Philippines Inc. 25 The witness further declared that the amount of P3,839,671.31 has been included in petitioner's 2013 AITR but it is not part of the present claim for refund. On January 13, 2016, petitioner filed with BIR RDO No. 44 an administrative claim for refund 26 together with supporting documents and BIR Form No. 191427 � The Court-commissioned Independent Certified Public Accountant (ICPA) Attorney Clifford Chua testified 28 that he audited and evaluated petitioner's documents and records to verify the validity of its claim for refund of its alleged unutilized and excess creditable income taxes withheld for FY 2013. Per his examination and verification of petitioner's pertinent documents and as stated in his Final ICPA 20 Exhibit "P-6". 21 Exhibit "P-7". 22 Exhibit "P-8". 23 Exhibit "P-9" 24 Exhibit "P-10". 25 Exhibits "P-11" and "P-12". 26 Exhibit "P-13". 27 Exhibit "P-14". 28 Exhibits "P-712" and "P-712-a".

Decision CTA Case No.9239 Report29, it is entitled to a tax refund on the unutilized and excess creditable income taxes withheld for FY 2013 in the amount of P13,653,367.43 which is equivalent to around 96�/o of its claimed refund/TCC. He based his computation from petitioner's Certificates of Tax Withheld and Official Receipts, among others. Petitioner's Senior Accountant Janis Myrtle P. Delos Reyes declared30 that she keeps copies of petitioner's financial documents, including its Audited Financial Statements (AFS) and tax returns. She likewise assists petitioner's Finance Manager in ensuring that petitioner complies with existing tax laws and regulations. She likewise supervises the preparation of its tax returns, filing thereof and payments of the corresponding tax liabilities. She sees to it that the returns and payments thereof are accurate and correct. She assisted petitioner's Finance Manager in handling tax issues related to the present case. By virtue of her position, she has custody of the consularized People's Republic of China General-Purpose Tax Payment Vouchers31 issued by the gth Tax Office, Shanghai Pudong New Area Office, SAT, and the gth Tax Office, Pudong New Area Office, Shanghai Bureau of Local Taxation, in favor of Aecom Limited Beijing for taxable year 2013. The said documents are the foreign tax certificates issued by the People's Republic of China to Aecom Limited Beijing proving that taxes were withheld from petitioner's income received from Aecom Limited Beijing. The witness however clarified that she learned about the case when it was endorsed to her by petitioner's former Senior Finance Manager before the latter left the company. On March 3, 2017, petitioner filed its Formal Offer of Evidence32, which was resolved in the Resolution 33 dated September 6, 2017. On September 26, 2017, petitioner moved for a reconsideration of the Resolution of September 29 Exhibit "P-713" and "P-713-a". 30 Exhibits "P-722" and "P-722-a". 31 Exhibits "P-714" to "P-721". 32 Docket, vol. 2, pp. 522-535. 33 Docket, vol. 2, pp. 920-921.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 6, 2017 and prayed for a commissioner's hearing34 � On December 20, 2017, petitioner filed its Supplemental Formal Offer of Evidence35 which the Court resolved in its Resolution36 dated January 9, 2018 by partially granting petitioner's bid for reconsideration. On January 29, 201837, respondent opted not to present any evidence in support of its defense. Consequently, the Court granted the parties thirty (30) days to file their respective memoranda. On April 5, 2018, 38 the case was considered submitted for decision after the parties complied with the Resolution of January 29, 2018. THE ISSUES The lone issue39 for the Court's resolution is: Whether Petitioner is entitled to its claim for refund of its excess and unutilized creditable withholding taxes for the fiscal year 2013 in the amount of Thirteen Million Nine Hundred Eighty- Two Thousand Four Hundred Thirty- Three Pesos (Php13,982,433.00). THE COURT'S RULING Section 76 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, pertinently provides, as follows: SEC. 76. Final Adjustment Return. - Every corporation liable to tax under Section 27 shall file a final adjustment return covering the total taxable income for the preceding calendar or fiscal year. If the 34 Docket, vol. 2, pp. 922-927. 35 Docket, vol. 2, pp. 941-949. 36 Docket, vol. 2, pp. 973-975. 37 Minutes of the Hearing, docket, p. 976. 38 Docket, vol. 2, p. 1014. 39 Statement of the Issue, JSFI, docket, vol. 1, p. 248.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 sum of the quarterly tax payments made during the said taxable year is not equal to the total tax due on the entire taxable income of that year, the corporation shall either: (A) Pay the balance of tax still due; or (B) Carry-over the excess credit; or (C) Be credited or refunded with the excess amount paid, as the case may be. In case the corporation is entitled to a tax credit or refund of the excess estimated quarterly income taxes paid, the excess amount shown on its final adjustment return may be carried over and credited against the estimated quarterly income tax liabilities for the taxable quarters of the succeeding taxable years. Once the option to carry-over and apply the excess quarterly income tax against income tax due for the taxable quarters of the succeeding taxable years has been made, such option shall be considered irrevocable for that taxable period and no application for cash refund or issuance of tax credit certificate shall be allowed therefor. From the above provision, there are two options available to a corporation whenever it overpays its income tax for the taxable year: (1) to carry over and apply the overpayment as tax credit against the estimated quarterly income tax liabilities of the succeeding taxable years (also known as automatic tax credit) until fully utilized (meaning, there is no prescriptive period); or (2) to apply for a cash refund or issuance of a tax credit certificate within the prescribed period.40 In Systra Philippines, Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 41 the Supreme Court held that in exercising its option, the corporation must signify in its annual corporate adjustment return, by marking the option box provided in the BIR form, its intention either to carry over the excess credit or to claim for a refund. To facilitate tax collection, these remedies are in the alternative and the choice of one precludes the other. However, once the carry-over option is 40 University Physicians Services, Inc. - Management, Inc. v. Commissioner of j Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 205955, March 7, 2018. 41 G.R. No. 176290, September 21, 2007.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 taken actually or constructively, it becomes irrevocable for that taxable period.42 The phrase "for that taxable period" merely identifies the excess income tax, subject of the option, by referring to the taxable period when it was acquired by the taxpayer.43 Evidently, a corporate taxpayer is not legally allowed a change of heart once it has chosen an option from the two alternative remedies, for the choice of one precludes the other. This is indicated in the Annual Income Tax Return for the BIR/Form 1702 under line 31, which reads, thus: If overpayment, mark one box only: (once the choice is made, the same is irrevocable) In its Original and Amended AITR for FY 2013, petitioner reflected the following income tax overpayments which it marked "To be refunded", viz: Sales/Revenues/Receipts/Fees Exhibit "P-4"44 Exhibit "P-5"45 Less: Cost of Sales/Services p 324,574,236.63 p 324,574,237.00 Gross Income from Operation Add: Non-Operating & Other Taxable 201,521,469.67 192,006,963.00 p 123,052,766.96 p 132,567,274.00 Income Not Subject to Final Tax Total Gross Income 11,928,661.75 11,928,662.00 Less: Deductions Net Taxable Income (Loss) p 134,981,428.71 p 144,495,936.00 38,923,282.99 48,437,790.00 p 96,058,145.72 p 96,058,146.00 Income Tax Due (30%) p 28,817,443.72 p 28,817,444.00 Less: Tax Credits/Payments p 63,341,047.90 p 26,255,791.00 16,717,046.56 16,717,046.00 Prior Year's Excess Tax Credits Creditable Tax Withheld for the First 3,815,392.95 3,815,393.00 Three Quarters 604,024.53 604,025.00 Creditable Tax Withheld for the Fourth Quarter Foreign Tax Credits 42 Phi/am Asset Management, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. Nos. 156637 and 162004, December 14, 2005; Systra Philippines, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Ibid. 43 Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Bank of the Philippine Islands, G.R. No. 178490, July 7, 2009. 44 Exhibit "P-4". 45 Exhibit "P-5". )

Decision p 84,477,511.94 p 47,392,255.00 CTA Case No.9239 P55,660,068. 22 P18,574,811.00 Total Tax Credits Tax Overpayment Per its Amended ITR for FY 2013, petitioner has total tax credits of P47,392,255.00, consisting of the following: Prior Year's Excess Tax Credits p 26,255 791.--:-oD Creditable Tax Withheld for the First Three Quarters 16,717 046.00 Creditable Tax Withheld for the Fourth Quarter 3,815 393.00 Foreign Tax Credits 604,025.00 Total Tax Credits P47,392,255.00 Petitioner claims that its FY 2013 income tax due amounting to P28,817,444.00 was paid utilizing P22,416, 120.00 of its prior years excess credits of P26,255, 791.00 and a portion of its creditable taxes withheld in FY 2013 in the amount of P6,401,324.00. Thus, leaving its prior year's excess credits of P3,839,671.00 (P26,255,791.00 less P22,416,120.00), foreign tax credits of P604,025.00 and creditable taxes withheld in FY 2013 of P14,131,115.00, unutilized as of the end of FY 2013. However, out of the P14,131,115.00 creditable taxes withheld in FY 2013, petitioner is only claiming refund of the amount P13,982,433.00 as computed below: 46 Creditable withholding taxes generated for the fiscal year 2013 as presented in petitioner's 2013 income tax return Creditable tax withheld for the first three quarters P16 717 046.00 p 20 532 439.00 Creditable tax withheld per BIR Form No. 2307 for the fourth 3 815 393.00 quarter 6 401,324.00 p 14 131 115.00 Less: Portion Utilized for the fiscal year 2013 148 682.00 Income tax due for 2013 P28 817 444.00 P13 982,433.00 Paid throuqh: Prior_year's excess credit P26 255 791.00 Prior year's excess credit not used in 2013 3 839 671.00 P22 416 120.00 Unutilized fiscal year 2013 creditable withholdinq taxes Less: Amount not included in the refund Amount of Refund To support its claim that it has sufficient prior years excess tax credits to cover its income tax due for FY 2013, petitioner presented the related Certificates of Creditable Tax Withheld at Source (BIR Forms No. 2307) 47 which were examined by the !CPA. As summarized by the !CPA, the BIR 46 Q&A No. 16, Exhibit "P-65". 47 Exhibits "P-511" to "P-668". .I

Decision CTA Case No.9239 Forms No. 2307 submitted by petitioner pertain to FYs 2009 to 2012 and reflected a total of P45,448,251.12 CWT, broken down as follows: 48 Period Covered Total CWTs FY 2009 p 6,964 516.89 FY 2010 FY 2011 9,871,922.93 FY 2012 1,673,948.80 Total 26,937 862.50 P45,448,251.12 A scrutiny of the said BIR Forms No. 2307 shows that the amount of P1,005,899.03, should be disallowed for the following reasons: Withholding Exhibit Client Tax Base ATC Rate Tax Amount Reference A. Period not indicated in BIR Form No. 2307 WC011 15% WC011 15% FCF Mineral Corporation p 1,104 644.13 WC011 15% p 165 696.62 P-543 WC010 15% 141 319.35 P-544 FCF Mineral Corporation 942 129.00 451 439.85 P-557 230 403.21 P-568 FCF Mineral Corporation 3,009 599.01 p 988,859.03 FCF Mineral Corporation 1,536 021.40 Sub-total p 6 592 393.54 B. BIR Form No. 2307 details unreadable Costa Del Hamilo p 85,200.00 WC010 10% p 8 520.00 P-556 WC120 2% P-567 Costa Del Hamilo 426,000.00 8 520.00 Sub-total p 511 200.00 p 17 040.00 Grand Total P7,103,593.54 P1,005,899.03 In addition, petitioner presented the following CWT Certificates to prove additional CWTs for FYs 2009 to 2011 in the amount of P13,621,469.90, detailed as follows: Client Tax Base ATC Rate Withholding Tax Exhibit 15% Amount P-669 15% P-670 Berong Nickel Corporation p 435,200.00 WCOll 15% p 65,280.00 P-671 10% P-672 Berong Nickel Corporation 2,068,172.00 WCOll 10% 309,925.80 P-673 10% P-674 Berong Nickel Corporation 474,560.00 WCOll 71,184.00 Costa Del Hamilo port & 565 700.00 WC010 56 570.00 Costa Del Hamilo Services 412 200.00 WC010 41 220.00 Davao Integrated 482,469.60 WC010 48,246.96 Stevedoring Corporation 19,092.00 WC011 15% 2,863.80 P-675 Hedcor, Inc. 28,450.00 WC120 2% 569.00 P-676 Intel Tech Phils. Inc. WC120 2% 384.00 P-677 19,200.00 Intel Tech Phils. Inc. 48 Exhibit "P-712". /

Decision CTA Case No.9239 Sun power Philippines 803,221.50 WC120 2% 16,064.43 P-678 Manufacturing Ltd 2% P-679 Sun power Philippines 681,074.00 WC120 2% 13,621.48 P-680 Manufacturing Ltd 15% P-681 15% P-682 Sun power Philippines 755,809.00 WC120 15,116.18 15% P-683 Manufacturing Ltd 2% P-684 Team Energy Corporation 1 282 972.60 WC051 192 445.89 WC011 15% P-685 Team Sual Corporation 2 405,108.27 15% 360,766.24 P-686 WC051 P-687 2009 p 10,433,228.97 2% p 1,194 257.78 P-688 BL Oombury Investments p 150,825.00 15% p 22,623.75 P-689 15% P-690 Holding, Inc. 2% P-691 Int'l Container Terminal 27,178,887.36 WC120 543,577.75 P-692 15% P-693 Services Inc. 15% P-694 15% P-695 Manila Water Company 16 048,136.20 WC011 15% 2 407,220.43 P-695 WC051 P-696 Team Energy Corporation 1 282 972.47 2% 192 445.87 WC011 2% P-697 The Asia Foundation 460 557.50 WC011 2% 9 211.15 WC160 P-698 2010 p 45,121 378.53 2% p 3,175,078.95 P-699 Asian Terminals, Inc. p 241,970.00 2% p 36,295.50 P-700 Asian Terminals, Inc. 5,681 450.00 2% 852 217.50 P-701 P-702 Far Southeast Gold Resources, 233,840.00 15% 4,676.80 P-703 15% P-704 Inc. 15% P-705 15% P-706 FCF Minerals Corporation 772,115.00 WC011 15% 115,817.25 197 220.00 WC011 15% 29 583.00 P-707 FCF Minerals Corporation 1,150,746.26 WC011 15% P-708 1 415 851.79 WC011 172,611.94 FCF Minerals Corporation 190 000.00 WC120 15% 212 377.77 P-709 1,330,000.00 WC160 15% FCF Minerals Corporation 3 800.00 P-710 11,638,827.51 WC120 2% 26,600.00 P-711 Holcim Philippines Inc. 15% 232,776.55 Holcim Philippines, Inc. 15% Int'l Container Terminal Services Inc. Int'l Container Terminal 18,348,512.13 WC120 366,970.24 Services Inc. Int'l Container Terminal 10,766,916.49 WC120 215,338.33 Services Inc. Int'l Container Terminal 22,899,080.01 WC120 457,981.60 Services Inc. Manila Water Company 11 359 234.20 WC011 1 703 885.13 11,423,793.90 WC011 1 713,569.09 Manila Water Company WC011 1 298 074.80 8 653 832.00 WC051 Manila Water Company 660 000.00 WC011 99 000.00 WC011 279,837.12 Mariveles Grain CorQ_oration 1 865 580.80 WC011 279 837.12 1 865 580.80 Maynilad Water Services, Inc. 27,107.10 180,714.00 Maynilad Water Services Inc. Quezon Power (Philippines) Ltd. Co. Sagittarius Mines, Inc. 189,750.00 WC011 28,462.50 393,000.00 WC011 58,950.00 Taganito HPAL Nickel Corporation Taganito HPAL Nickel 6,026,080.00 WC120 120,521 60 Corporation Team Energy Corporation 3 138 327.47 WC051 470 749.12 2 967 287.47 WC051 445 093.12 Team Sual Corporation P123,589, 709.83 p 9,252 133.18 P179,144,317.33 P13,621 469.90 2011 GRAND TOTAL Note however, that there is a discrepancy between the prior year's excess CWTs being claimed by petitioner as deduction from its income tax due for FY 2013 (P26,255, 791.00) and the total CWTs reflected in the BIR Forms No. 2307 presented by petitioner for FYs 2009 to 2012 (P58,063,821.9949). Hence, there is a doubt as to whether the examined BIR Forms No. 2307 included those 49 P45,448,251.12 plus P13,621,469.90 less Pl,005,899.03.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 which were already claimed as deduction in petitioner's corresponding prior year's. The Court however was unable to verify the same as petitioner failed to present its AITRs for the prior year's covered by said CWTs (i.e., FYs 2009 to 2012). Thus, the Court cannot ascertain whether the CWTs in the amount of P58,063,821.99 as represented by said CWTs pertain to petitioner's total excess tax credits over its income tax liabilities for FYs 2009 to 2012. Since petitioner failed to prove that it had prior years excess credits, petitioner's current year's creditable withholding taxes of P20,532,439.00 are not sufficient to cover its income tax due for FY 2013 in the amount of P28,817,444.00, as illustrated below: Income Tax Due for FY 2013 p 28,817 444.00 Paid through: --- Prior year's excess credits Current year's CWT credits, before 20,532,439.00 ICPA and Court disallowances P8,285,005.00 Income Tax Still Due Given that there are no excess CWTs for FY 2013 which may be the subject of a claim for refund under Section 76 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, petitioner's claim for refund of excess and unutilized creditable income taxes withheld for FY 2013 must be denied. Further, in order to be entitled to the refund sought, petitioner must prove compliance with the following requirements of the law, to wit: 1) The claim must be filed with the CIR within the two-year period from the date of payment of the tax; 2) The fact of withholding must be established by a copy of a statement duly issued by the payor to the payee showing the amount paid and the amount of the tax withheld; and

Decision CTA Case No.9239 3) It must be shown on the return that the income received was declared as part of the gross income. 50 Anent the first requisite, Sections 204(C) and 229 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, relevantly provide: SEC. 204. Authority of the Commissioner to Compromise, Abate and Refund or Credit Taxes. - The Commissioner may - XXX XXX XXX (C) Credit or refund taxes erroneously or illegally received or penalties imposed without authority, refund the value of internal revenue stamps when they are returned in good condition by the purchaser, and, in his discretion, redeem or change unused stamps that have been rendered unfit for use and refund their value upon proof of destruction. No credit or refund of taxes or penalties shall be allowed unless the taxpayer files in writing with the Commissioner a claim for credit or refund within two (2) years after the payment of the tax or penalty: Provided, however, That a return filed showing an overpayment shall be considered as a written claim for credit or refund. SEC. 229. Recovery of Tax Erroneously or Illegally Collected. - No suit or proceeding shall be maintained in any court for the recovery of any national internal revenue tax hereafter alleged to have been erroneously or illegally assessed or collected, or of any penalty claimed to have been collected without authority, or of any sum alleged to have been excessively or in any manner wrongfully collected, until a claim for refund or credit has been duly filed with the Commissioner; but such suit or proceeding may be maintained, whether or not such tax, penalty, or sum has been paid under protest or duress. �5 Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Mirant (Philippines) Operations Corporation, G.R. No. 171742, June 15, 2011 and Mirant (Philippines) Operations Corporation (Formerly: Southern Energy Asia-Pacific Operations (Phils.), Inc.) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 176165.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 In any case, no such suit or proceeding shall be filed after the expiration of two (2) years from the date of payment of the tax or penalty regardless of any supervening cause that may arise after payment: Provided, however, That the Commissioner may, even without claim therefor, refund or credit any tax, where on the face of the return upon which payment was made, such payment appears clearly to have been erroneously paid. (emphases supplied). Pursuant to the above prov1s1ons, the two-year prescriptive period for claiming a refund commences to run from the date of filing of the FAR. 51 It is only when the FAR covering the whole year is filed that the taxpayer would know whether a tax is still due or a refund can be claimed based on the adjusted and audited figures. 52 In the instant case, petitioner claims that it had excess and unutilized CWT for FY 2013. Petitioner filed its Original ITR for FY 2013 on January 15, 2014 through the SIR's EFPS with EFPS Reference No. 12140000836424253 . Petitioner had two years from the filing of the FAR within which to file a claim for refund of excess CWT, both in the administrative and judicial levels. Counting from January 15, 2014, petitioner had until January 15, 2016, within which to file both administrative and judicial claims for refund of its excess and unutilized CWT for FY 2013. Hence, its administrative claim for refund filed on January 13, 201654 via a request letter to BIR Revenue District Office No. 44, together with its Application for Tax Credits/Refunds (BIR Form No. 1914) 55 and the Petition for Review filed before this Court on January 14, 201656 were seasonably filed. As for the second and third requisites, Section 2.58.3(8) of Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 02-98, as amended, states: 51 ACCRA Investments Corporation v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, et a/., G.R. No. 96322, December 20, 1991. 52 Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. TMX Sales, Inc., et a/., G.R. No. 83736, January 15, 1992. 53 Exhibit "P-4". 54 Exhibits "P-13" to "P-13-b". 55 Exhibits "P-14" to "P-14-a". 56 Docket, vol. 1, p. 10.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 SECTION 2.58.3. Claim for Tax Credit or Refund. - XXX XXX XXX (B) Claims for tax credit or refund of any creditable income tax which was deducted and withheld on income payments shall be given due course only when it is shown that the income payment has been declared as part of the gross income and the fact of withholding is established by a copy of the withholding tax statement duly issued by the payor to the payee showing the amount paid and the amount of tax withheld therefrom. "(Emphasis supplied) As to the fact of withholding of the subject claim, the audit conducted by the ICPA revealed that out of the P20,532,439.00 reported CWTs for FY 2013, only the amount of P20,408,534.47 is properly supported by BIR Forms No. 2307, detailed as follows: Qtr. Client TIN Number Tax Base WTC Tax Withholding Ex h. Rate Tax Amount Ref. per BIR Form No.2307 2 APCC 208-134-558-0000 4 APCC 208-134-558-0000 5 302 642.00 WC160 2% 106 052.84 P-71 208-134-558-0000 4 150 634.00 WC160 2% 83 012.68 P-72 4 APCC 000-132-413-0000 1 318 464.00 WC011 15% 000-132-413-0000 197 769.60 P-73 4 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 4,980,005.40 WC011 15% TERMINALS INC 000-132-413-0000 747,000.81 P-74 000-132-413-0000 4,099,177.27 WC011 15% 4 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 4 821 131.07 WC011 15% 614,876.59 P-75 TERMINALS INC 000-132-413-0000 723,169.66 P-76 000-132-413-0000 4 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 000-132-413-0000 000-132-413-0000 4 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 4 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 4 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 3 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 3 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 3 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 3 ASIAN TERMINALS INC 2 ASIAN TERMINALS INC

Decision CTA Case No.9239 2 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 2 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 2 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 2 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 2 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 4,534,068.53 WC011 15% 680,110.28 P-77 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC 1 ASIAN 000-132-413-0000 TERMINALS INC FAR SOUTHEAST 1 GOLD 000-158-973-0000 RESOURCES, INC. 8 327 613.47 WC010 15% 1_L249 142.02 P-78 1 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 852 427.28 WC011 15% 127 864.09 P-79 CORPORATION 1 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 987 452.49 WC011 15% 148 117.87 P-80 CORPORATION 2 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 555 704.00 WC011 15% 83 355.60 P-81 CORPORATION 2 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 23 940.00 WC011 15% 3 591.00 P-82 CORPORATION 2 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 310_L872.00 WC011 15% 46 630.80 P-83 CORPORATION 3 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 389__L160.83 15% 58 374.12 CORPORATION 3891160.83 15% 58 374.12 WC011 P-84 FCF MINERALS 3 CORPORATION 238-154-069-0000 3 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 658 301.66 15% 98 745.25 CORPORATION 389 160.83 WC011 15% 58 374.12 3 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 P-85 CORPORATION 3 FCF MINERALS 238-154-069-0000 229 847.28 15% 34 477.09 CORPORATION 1 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 165 178.60 WC050 15% 24 776.79 P-86 INC 4 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 1 321 428.60 WC051 15% 198 214.29 P-87 INC 3 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 225 714.27 WC011 15% 33 857.14 P-88 INC 3 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 1 706 000.00 WC051 15% 255 900.00 P-89 INC 3 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 660 714.27 WC051 15% 99 107.14 P-90 INC 2 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 642 857.13 WC011 15% 96 428.57 P-91 INC 2 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 950 000.00 WC050 15% 142 500.00 P-92 INC 2 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 760 000.00 WC050 15% 114 000.00 P-93 INC 964 285.73 WC011 15% 216 294.67 2 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 WC050 15% 144 642.86 P-94 INC WC050 15% 32 444.20 P-95 P-96 1 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 INC 2 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000

Decision CTA Case No.9239 INC 330,357.13 49,553.57 330 357.13 WC050 49,553.57 1 FILINVEST LAND 000-553-224-0000 15% P-97 INC INTERNATIONAL 4 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 231,758.16 WC120 2% 4,635.16 P-98 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 4 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 2,941,062.66 WC120 2% 58,821.25 P-99 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 3 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 3,964,992.38 WC120 2% 79,299.85 P-100 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 3 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 96,296.21 WC120 2% 1,925.92 P-101 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 3 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 7,921,356.32 WC120 2% 158,427.13 P-102 TERMINAL I SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 2 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 2 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL SERVICES INC 14,325,684.02 WC120 2% 286,513.68 P-103 INTERNATIONAL I I 2 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL P-1041 12,832.66 SERVICES INC l INTERNATIONAL 403,163.33 P-105 2 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 1 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 641,633.12 WC120 2% TERMINAL 20,158,166.56 WC120 2% SERVICES INC 418,683.00 WC120 2% 2,851,228.67 WC011 15% INTERNATIONAL 1 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 1 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 1 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 TERMINAL SERVICES INC INTERNATIONAL 3 CONTAINER 000-323-228-0000 8,373.66 P-106 TERMINAL 427,684.30 P-107 SERVICES INC I 3 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY 3 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY 005-038-428-0000 3 MANILA WATER COMPANY 3 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY 3 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY

Decision CTA Case No.9239 2 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY 956,292.26 WC011 15% 143,443.84 P-108 MANILA WATER 2 COMPANY 005-038-428-0000 1 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY 1 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 I COMPANY 1,835,304.61 P-109 1 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 12,235,364.07 WC011 15% COMPANY 1 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY 1 MANILA WATER 005-038-428-0000 COMPANY MAYNILAD 4 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC 815,507.53 WC011 15% 122,326.13 P-110 MAYNILAD 4 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC MAYNILAD 4 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC MAYNILAD 3 WATER 005-393-442-0000 993,981.33 WC011 15% 149,097.20 P-111 SERVICES INC MAYNILAD 3 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC MAYNILAD 1 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC MAYNILAD 1 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC 2,664,480.00 WC011 15% 399,672.00 P-112 MAYNILAD 1 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC MAYNILAD 1 WATER 005-393-442-0000 SERVICES INC 4 OCEANAGOLD 004-870-171-0000 571 900.00 WC011 15% 85 785.00 P-113 PHILIPPINES INC 345,231.00 WC120 6,904.62 P-114 3 OCEANAGOLD 004-870-171-0000 2% 188,083.21 P-115 PHILIPPINES INC 1,802,138.05 WC120 2% 5 303.57 P-116 3 OCEANAGOLD 004-870-171-0000 1 013 603.00 WC011 15% PHILIPPINES INC 265 178.50 WC160 2% 1 OCEANAGOLD 004-870-171-0000 PHILIPPINES INC 1 OCEANAGOLD 004-870-171-0000 PHILIPPINES INC 1 OCEANAGOLD 004-870-171-0000 PHILIPPINES INC 4 ROCKWELL LAND 004-710-062-0000 CORPORATION 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 10,403,095.07 WC011 15% 1,560,464.26 P-117 MINES INC 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 I MINES INC 4 SAGITTARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC

Decision CTA Case No.9239 4 SAGITIARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 002-914-398-0000 002-914-398-0000 3 SAGITIARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 002-914-398-0000 002-914-398-0000 3 SAGITIARIUS 002-914-398-0000 7,613,575.47 WC011 15% 1,142,036.32 P-118 MINES INC 002-914-398-0000 002-914-398-0000 3 SAGITIARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 002-914-398-0000 002-914-398-0000 2 SAGITIARIUS 002-914-398-0000 MINES INC 000-060-741-0000 2 SAGITIARIUS 000-662-551-0000 MINES INC 000-662-551-0000 2 SAGITIARIUS MINES INC 000-662-551-0000 2 SAGITIARIUS 000-662-551-0000 MINES INC 10,943,345.87 WC011 15% 1,641,501.88 P-119 SAGITIARIUS 2 MINES INC 2 SAGITIARIUS MINES INC 2 SAGITIARIUS MINES INC 2 SAGITIARIUS MINES INC 1 SAGITIARIUS 7 418 535.09 WC011 15% 1 112 780.26 P-120 MINES INC 582 330.00 WC011 15% 87 349.50 P-121 1 SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION SHELL 3 PHILIPPINES EXPLORATION B.V. SHELL 3 PHILIPPINES 9,656,298.18 WC160 2% 193,125.96 P-122 EXPLORATION B.V. SHELL 3 PHILIPPINES EXPLORATION B.V. SHELL 2 PHILIPPINES 2,179,852.03 WC160 2% 43,597.04 P-123 EXPLORATION B.V. SILANGAN 1 MINDANAO 000-283-731-0000 2,864,824.00 WC011 15% 429,723.60 P-124 MINING CO. SILANGAN 4 MINDANAO 000-283-731-0000 1,432,412.00 WC011 15% 214,861.80 P-125 2,864,824.00 WC011 15% 429,723.60 P-126 MINING CO. 100,000.00 WC010 10% 10,000.00 P-127 SILANGAN 350,000.00 WC010 10% 35,000.00 P-128 2 MINDANAO 000-283-731-0000 MINING CO. ST. LUKE'S 2 MEDICAL 003-058-089-0000 CENTER ST. LUKE'S 3 MEDICAL 003-058-089-0000 CENTER STA. CLARA 1 INTERNATIONAL 000-385-981-0000 CORPORATION 2 130 000.00 WC050 15% 319 500.00 P-129 565,900.00 WC051 15% 84,885.00 P-130 SURESTE 1 PROPERTIES 002-417-577-0000 INC. 1 SURESTE 002-417-577-0000 PROPERTIES

Decision CTA Case No.9239 INC. SURESTE 002-417-577-0000 257,175.00 WC051 15% 38,576.25 P-131 4 PROPERTIES 581,268.00 WCOll 15% 87,190.20 P-132 000-145-459-0000 189,580.00 WC011 15% 28,437.00 P-133 INC. 2 520 000.00 WC051 15% 378 000.00 P-134 TAGANITO 000-145-459-0000 4 MINING 001-726-870-0000 2,228,335.07 WCOll 15% 334,250.26 P-135 CORPORATION 001-726-870-0000 001-726-870-0000 162 000.00 P-136 TAGANITO 001-726-870-0000 109 241.25 P-137 001-726-870-0000 136,498.88 P-138 3 MINING 001-726-870-0000 328,638.66 P-139 001-726-870-0000 654,306.44 P-140 CORPORATION 001-726-870-0000 003-841-103-0000 84,958.60 P-141 2 TEAM ENERGY 003-841-103-0000 CORPORATION 24,273.89 P-142 237-463-097-0000 2 TEAM ENERGY CORPORATION 237-463-097-0000 2 TEAM ENERGY CORPORATION 2 TEAM ENERGY CORPORATION 1 TEAM ENERGY 1 080 000.00 WC051 15% CORPORATION 728 275.00 WCOll 15% 1 TEAM ENERGY CORPORATION 3 TEAM ENERGY CORPORATION 909,992.53 WCOll 15% 3 TEAM ENERGY CORPORATION 4 TEAM SUAL 2 190 924.40 WC051 15% CORPORATION 4 362 042.93 WC051 15% 2 TEAM SUAL CORPORATION TRANS AIRE 3 DEVELOPMENT 4,247,930.05 WC120 2% HOLDINGS CORPORATION TRANS AIRE 4 DEVELOPMENT 1,213,694.30 WC120 2% HOLDINGS CORPORATION 205 421,696.30 20,408 534.47 Less: TOTAL 20,532,439.00 per ITR57 and (123,904.53) SAWT Without Proper Creditable Withholding Tax Certificates (BIR Form No. 2307) However, the Court noted that BIR Form No. 2307 marked as Exhibit P-78, representing CWT amounting to P1,249,142.02, is not legible, hence, should be disallowed. Consequently, petitioner complied with the second requisite, but only to the extent of P19,159,392.45 (P20,408,534.47 less P1,249,142.02). 57 Exhibit "P-5", docket, vol. 2, p. 571.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 In relation to the third condition, viz., that the return of the recipient must show that the income payment received was declared as part of its gross income, the !CPA performed the following indicated in his Report: I traced the income payments in the Company's books of accounts, i.e. Tax Recovery General Ledger account (Exhibit 'P-283') and Project Status Report (PSR) Books of Account for 2013 and 2012 and Reimbursements Ledger (Exhibits 'P-508', 'P-509' and 'P-510', respectively), and audited financial statements for 2013 and 2012 (Exhibits 'P- 144' and 'P-145' respectively) and ascertained that the income payments as well as the creditable withholding tax were properly reported therein. In order to ultimately trace the income payments from the Certificates of Tax Withheld to Company's Audited Financial Statements and Income Tax Returns, it is necessary to consider the method of income recognition of the Company. Please note that the Company recognizes income based on the percentage of completion method as stated in page 9, note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements. Under this method, income is generally recognized based on the services performed to date as a percentage of the total services to be performed. Hence, income is booked as follows: Account/Particulars Debit Credit Work in Progress (WIP) xxxx xxxx Revenue Accordingly, clients are billed (invoiced) based on milestones indicated in the construction agreement (Project Contracts). Thus, there is a timing difference between revenue recognition and billing. The billing (invoice) is generally booked as: Account/Particulars Debit Credit Accounts Receivable xxxx xxxx Work in Progress

Decision CTA Case No.9239 When the receivables are collected, the collection is generally booked as: Account/Particulars Debit Credit Cash xxxx xxxx VAT Deferred xxxx xxxx Tax Recovery (Creditable Withholding Tax) xxxx Accounts Receivable VAT Output In view of the above-described method by the Company, after ascertaining that the income payments from the Certificate of Tax Withheld (BIR Form No. 2307) are properly supported by Official Receipts, I traced the same to the 2013 and 2012 Work in Progress Account or Revenue Account and Reimbursements Ledger (Exhibits 'P-508', 'P-509', 'P-510'). The results of procedures are noted in Annex 'F'. The Company also provided the invoices (Exhibits 'P-284' to 'P-473') and project contracts (Exhibits 'P-474' to 'P-507') in relation to income payments received in FY 2013. I traced the Official Receipts to the invoices available. Thereafter, I traced the invoices to the project contracts. The results of procedures are noted in Annex 'E'. As mentioned earlier, each invoice is traceable to a project contract, and the Work In Progress and Revenue Books of Accounts of the Company known as the Project Status Report (PSR) of FY 2013 and 2012 and Reimbursement Ledger. The results of this procedure is noted in Annex 'F'. The variance noted in Annex 'F' is due to the forex gain and forex loss on some of the accounts paid for in foreign currency since the time of recording of the income is at the time when the services were performed and the collections were booked at the time of collection. While, the other variance reported is due to rounding off and minimal discrepancy/ies which would not affect the overall presentation of the financial statements." /

Decision CTA Case No.9239 Guided by the foregoing, to ascertain whether the income corresponding to the excess CWTs being claimed were reported in the year of claim, the Court must trace the income payments from the CWT certificates to the related Official Receipts and Invoices and the recording thereof to the Tax Recovery General Ledger (Creditable Withholding Tax Ledger) to Accounts Receivable and Work in Progress Account or Revenue Account and Reimbursements Ledger (Exhibits "P-508", "P-509", and "P-510"). Using Annex "F" of the ICPA Report, the Court attempted to trace each CWT to the alleged recording in petitioner's books. However, the tracing proved futile as the scanned copies of the supporting ledgers (i.e., Exhibits "P- 283" and "P-508" to "P-510") were hardly readable. Moreover, the Court was unable to verify whether the total income recorded per petitioner's books tallies with that reflected in its 2013 ITR. Hence, petitioner failed to prove that the income upon which the taxes were withheld were included in the return of the recipient. In sum, since petitioner failed to prove that it had prior years excess credits, there are no excess CWTs for FY 2013 which may be the subject of a claim for refund under Section 76 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended. Moreover, even assuming arguendo that petitioner had enough prior year's excess CWTs and has excess and unutilized CWTs for FY 2013, it failed to prove that the income upon which the taxes were withheld were included in the return of the recipient. In other words, petitioner failed to prove its entitlement to a refund of its alleged excess and unutilized creditable income taxes withheld for FY 2013. On a final note, a tax refund claimant has the burden of proving the factual basis of his or her refund claim. This is because tax refunds are in the nature of tax exemptions, the statutes of which are construed strictissimi juris against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the taxing authority. Taxes are the lifeblood of the nation, therefore statutes that allow exemptions are construed strictly against the grantee and liberally in favor of the government. 58 58 Philippine Phosphate Fertilizer Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 141973, June 28, 2005.

Decision CTA Case No.9239 WHEREFORE, the instant Petition for Review filed by petitioner Aecom Philippines, Inc. on January 14, 2016, is hereby DENIED, for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. I Concur: ~.~.,d,, MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice ATTESTATION I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court's Divisi n s ciate Justice cting Chairperson CERTIFICATION Pursuant to Section 13 of Article VIII of the Constitution, and the Division Acting Chairperson's Attestation, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above Decision were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court's Division. Presiding Justice