COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. SCICINDUSTRIAL CORP.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ENBANC COMMISSIONER OF CTA EB NO. 2503 INTERNAL REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 9616) P etitioner, P rese nt: -versus- DEL ROSARIO, P.J., SCICINDUSTRIAL CORP., CASTANEDA, JR., UY, RINGPIS-LIBAN, MANAHAN, BACORRO-VILLE N A, MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, REYES-FAJARDO, and CU I-DAVID, JJ. RESOLUTION O n June 28,2021, a "Motion for Extension of Time (To File P etition for Review)"1 was filed in the instant case through registered mail. Records show only four (4) copies were flied. On July 14, 2021, a Minute Resolutio n was issued ordering P etitioner to submit additional six (6) copies o f the motion within ten (10) days from no tice. Failure to submit the additional copies within the period given shall constrain the Court to consider the said pleading as deemed not filed. On July 15,2021, a "Petition for Review"2 was filed. On November 15, 2021, a Resolution3 was issued reiterating the July 14, 2021 ~Iinute Resolution, and ordering Petitioner to file additional copies of the " Motion for Extension of Time (To File Petition for Review)". Rollo, pp. 1-5. 2 Id., at pp. 7-65. 3 Id., at pp. 67-69.

RESOLUTION ITA EB NO. 2503 (ITA Case No. 9616) On March 04, 2022, the Judicial Records Division issued a Records Verification Report stating that Petitioner failed to submit additional copies of his "Motion for Extension of Time (To File Petition for Review)". It must be noted that Petitioner failed to flle the required ten (1 0) copies of its "Motion for Extension of Time (To File Petition for Review)", despite being ordered by this Court twice. As such, said motion is deemed not flied. Considering that the period within which the "Petition for Review" should be filed was not extended and that the appeal was filed after the period provided for under the rules, the dismissal of the case is in order. It is settled that the perfection of an appeal in the manner and within the period set by law is not only mandatory, but jurisdictional, and failure of a party to perfect an appeal within the period fixed by law renders the judgment final and executory. Once a decision attains finality, it becomes the law of the case and no Court has the power to revise, review, change or alter the same. WHEREFORE, the instant case is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction for failure by Petitioner to flle its "Petition for Review" within the fifteen-day reglementary period under Section 3(b), Rule 8 of the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals (RRCTA). SO ORDERED. Presiding Justice :r.--.r: c.~,..9.. JUANITO C. CASTANEDA', JR. Associate Justice ERL~.UY Associate Justice

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2503 (CTA Case No. 9616) Qt.r. ~ -4~ MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice c~' r./11-'-~-- CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice I"" JEAN MARIE MARIARO ~YE~-FAJro ~~r.~./1. MARIAN IvY41. Associate Justice Amu~ LANEE S. CUI-DAVID Associate Justice