PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ANTONIO VALERIANO M. BERNARDO (A.V.M. BERNARDO ENGINEERING) (AT-LARGE: Address: No. 604 T. Santiago St., Lingunan, Valenzuela City, Metro Manila

�- llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 22-000425-0006 CTA Fotm No.8 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION CTA CRIM. CASE NO. 0-929 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff, -versus- ANTONIO VALERIANO M. NOTICE OF RESOLUTION BERNARDO (A.V.M. BERNARDO ENGINEERING) (AT-LARGE: Address: No. 604 T. Santiago St., Lingunan~ Valenzuela City~ Metro Manila), Accused. To: PROSECUTOR GENERAL BENEDICTO A. MALCONTENTO SENIOR ASSISTANT STATE PROSECUTOR MA. CRISTINA A. MONTERA-BAROT Department of Justice Padre Faura Street E1mita, Manila 1000 COMMlSSIONER OF .INTERNAL REVENUE Thru:Prosecution Division Bureau oflntemal Revenue BIR National Office Building BIR Road, Diliman, Quezon City URBANO LAW OFFICE Suite 1105, Future Point Plaza I 112 Panay Avenue, Quezon City ATTY. CATHERINE ROSER. TORTOLES ATTY. M.ERRISSA CAGAM.PAN-TALATALA Bureau of Internal Revenue Room 704, 7th Floor, Prosecution Division BIR National Office Building BIR Road, Diliman, Quezon City GREETINGS: You are hereby notified by these presents that on February 8, 2023, a Resolution was rendered in the above-entitled case, copy of which is attached hereto. Quezon City, Philippines, February 13, 2023. AttyE. MxeacuritaivJeo~ h~o. uCrthaIIn-Te

�- REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CTA Crim. Case No. 0-929 Plaintiff (NPS Docket No. XVI-INV-16B-00056) -versus- For: Violation of Section 255 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended Members: ANTONIO VALERIANO M. DEL ROSARIO, PJ, Chairperson, BERNARDO, MANAHAN, and (A.V.M. BERNARDO REYES-FAJARDO lL ENGINEERING), (AT-LARGE: Address: No. 604 T. Santiago St., Lingunan, Valenzuela Promulgated: City, Metro Manila), Accused. rFEB 0 8.2023 / t( flf 111!. )(----------------------------------- - ~- -------- -)( RESOLUTION On November 28, 2022, the Court issued a Resolution, dismissing the case in the following fashion: WHEREFORE, the Court finds no probable cause to issue a warrant of arrest against accused Antonio Valeriano M. Bernardo, on the ground of prescription of the offense charged. Likewise, on the same ground, the instant Information docketed as CTA Crim. Case No. 0-929, is DISMISSED. SO ORDERED. On December 27, 2022, the prosecution filed a Formal Entry of Appearance with Motion for Reconsideration. 1 In its motion, the prosecution finds erroneous the ruling that the criminal action filed against the accused is already barred by the statute of limitations. 1 With accused's Opposition / Comment (On Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration dated December 27, 2022) filed on January 25, 2023.

�' RESOLUTION CTA Crirn. Case No . 0-929 Section 281 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), as amended, provides among others that the five (5)-year prescriptive period for tax offenses commences from discovery thereof and institution of judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment, and shall be suspended when proceedings are instituted against the persons guilty of the transgression. For the prosecution, prescription has not set in as the prescriptive period, in this case, began to run on February 18, 2016 when the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) filed a complaint for violation of Sections 254 and 255 of the NIRC of 1997 against accused Antonio Valeriano M. Bernardo with the DOJ, but was likewise interrupted for the same reason that proceedings were instituted on the same date. The instant Motion must be denied. Item III (2)( c) of the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases provides: III. Procedure XXX XXX XXX 2. Motions XXX XXX XXX (c) Meritorious Motions. - Motions that allege plausible grounds supported by relevant documents and/ or competent evidence, except those that are already covered by the Revised Guidelines, are meritorious motions, xxx: XXX XXX XXX The motion for reconsideration of the resolution of a meritorious motion shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days from receipt of such resolution, xxx. Motions that do not conform to the requirements stated above shall be considered unmeritorious and shall be denied outright.

.. �- RESOLUTION CTA Crim. Case No. 0-929 From the foregoing, the party aggrieved by the Resolution of the Court is conferred a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days, reckoned from receipt thereof, within which to file a motion for reconsideration, lest the same shall be denied. As admitted, 2 the prosecution received the Resolution dated November 28, 2022, dismissing the present case on the ground of prescription on December 12, 2022. Consistent with the above rule, the prosecution had a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days or until December 17, 2022 to seek reconsideration of the adverse ruling. The prosecution's Motion for Reconsideration having been belatedly posted only on December 27, 2022, the Court is left with no other recourse but to deny the same. Further, even assuming that the motion is timely filed, said motion shall likewise be denied for lack of merit. As extensively discussed in the Resolution dated November 28, 2022, the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals explicitly provides that the institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the running of the period of prescription. The prescription of the tax offense, in this case, began to run from the discovery and institution of proceedings for its investigation on February 18, 2016. Thus, the right of the government to institute the case against accused had already prescribed when the Information was filed before this Court on September 6, 2022. WHEREFORE, the prosecution's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. The Formal Entry of Appearance of the Deputized Special Prosecutors for the Bureau of Internal Revenue as counsel for plaintiff is hereby NOTED. SO ORDERED. Presiding Justice 2 Page 2, Paragraph No . 5, Prosecution's Motion for Reconsideration .

RESOLUTION CTA Crim. Case No. 0-929 ~~ � '~ CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice ~~rr~.r~ MARIAN IV#. REY~S-FA]ARDO Associate Justice