COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. JUAN MIGUEL M. ARROYO & MA. ANGELA M. ARROYO (GOMECO METAL CORP.)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ENBANC COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB NO. 2646 REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 9341) Petitioner, -versus- Present: Del Rosario, P.J., Ringpis-Lib an, Manahan, Baeorro-Villena, Modesto-San Pedro, Reyes-Fajardo, Cui-David, Ferrer-Flores, and Angeles, ]]. JUAN MIGUEL M. ARROYO AND Promulgated: MA. ANGELA M. ARROYO (GOMECO METAL CORP.), Respondents. X---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------X RESOLUTION RINGPIS-LIBAN,j: For resolutio n is the peLiLioncr's "l\Io tion for Reconsideration"1 received by the Court o n ovcmbcr 10, 2023, wiLh respondents' Opposition flied by registered mail on D ecember 15, 2023. Petitioner seeks reco nsideration o f this Court's Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads as follo ws: "WHE REFORE , premises considered, the instant Petition for Review is DENIED for lack of jurisdiction/ 1 Rollo, CTA EB 0 . 26tl6, pp. 288-299.

Rr �:sc )J ,L 1TH )L\ CT.\ I �:H I'\0. 16.1(1 SO ORDERED.'' Petitioner claims that the Court L3!1 Bml( erred in dismissing the Petition for Review for lack of Jurischction. Petitioner appeals for the kind indulgence of the Court for the liberali;cation of the rules and to admit the Motion for Reconsideration !lied before 1he Court in Division as well as the instant Petition for Review. Petitioner\ counsel imists that to strictly apply the reglementary period to file an appeal IJCCore the Court would cause a gross miscarriage of justice since owing to the l'ilects of the unforeseen spread of the pandemic, there has been a drastic drop in the collection of taxes and the government is in dire need of the funds needed w cmb 1he further spread of the virus as well as for the support and recoYcn� of the nation's economy. Lastly, even assuming argmndo that petitioner belated II- filed the .\lotion for Reconsideration, petitioner submits that as representative of the government in the collection and enforcement of taxes, petitioner should not he hound h1� the errors of its agents. On the other hand, respondents state that the liberality in the interpretation and application ol the rules can be invoked only in proper cases and under justifiable u1usc,; ami circumstances. The petitioner's unexplained and inexcusable dclar in f11i,,g the .\lotion for Recon,;idcration despite the State's vast powers and rcsourn�s suppm1111g illln, docs not warrant the relaxation of procedural rules. },fter consideration. tlw Court E11 Ba11r resolves to deny the "Motion for Reconsideration." The Court r:11 Bm;( reviewed the grounds relied upon by petitioner in support of hiS .\I ot ion for Reconsideration but finds no cogent reason to grant the same. In the assailed L:111lr111, Decision, it was stated that the petitioner's right to appeal has already lapsed since the assailed Decision of the Court in Division has become final and cxecuton for failure of petitioner to timely file a motion for reconsideration. Despite thereof, the Court E11 Ball( proceeded to evaluate and discuss petitioner's argmncnts raised before this Court anent the aforestated issue on the finalit\� of the assailed Decision. However, the Court En Banr finds no valid justification to compel a IJH>ditlcation or reversal of the assailed Decision promulgated on October 2.1, 2112.1. It must be stressed that among the ends to which a motion for reconsideration is addrc"ed, one is precisely to convince the Court that its ruling is erroneous and improper. contr;m� to law or the evidence." If the movant failed to do so, the motion Cor reconsideration must necessarily fail. WHEREFORE, ptTmtscs considered, the "J\Iotion for Reconsideration" is DENIED for lack of meri~

Pav;c 3 of 3 1\1 ,:S< ll ,L:TJ< 101 CT.\ EH :-.i( ). 16-1-6 SO ORDERED. (')..;. ~ ~ MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice WE CONCUR: ROMAN G. DEL ROSARIO Presiding Justice ~" 7- A~�..~~""'�..t. c~--- cATHERINE T. MANAHAN Ass~iate Justice LENA MARlAR :::::::.V.Y-~F.rfiE~.S-c~pAJ~!R~iO ~ 1\ssociate Justice ~AAA'cf;n'j LANEin. ~01-DAVID Associate Justice ~~ �~ S CORAZdN G. FERRER- Associate Justice HENRY~~NGELES ,-\ssociate Justice