CTA Case No. 4770 (Decision)

'T tF. PHILlPPlN!!;a AP.PEALS latntlff, � YUI\ll � X� � t .1� 11 � D CI � t1on lnstttut r plalntlff f t -----recover.,. f t e nt of 17, � all� 1 rep � � n 1n wrpa nt of lnln ta � for t fourt tu of 19�1. t e � � of :ra oc nt �� tlal latton f f!Ct� (he:relnaf ~ ef r.r Tl ) presented t p t fact est lls thl.s case are au r� u er. ' Cona 11clatecl in lalntlff, ( 1 a Co." fo o.rt) , lt a d �..tJ.c t e C!tv of an 11. loe t d 1n lollo C t � � n, tt� 1nc al ff1ce perating 1ts 1n1n c � At tha tiM � plaintiff ���t lln aln1t, urlg o. s 1t d file ltl cc � c w t th r lre� nt1 of ect1on ..t 1o a1 Internal �� co. en ,ln 1nln d ~ aft r t close of the corres- lng c alenda,r � � arte.r the ��1� t 352

" d 353

- , .� 3 5 tl

.. . plaintiff � " 3 55

� ) . -....... -- .. - -....-.... � 356

D CISIOI - CIVIL CAS 10. 4770 - 6- the rormer in the ourt or Fil"'st Instance of Manila on February 26, 194 � Thia vas subsequentlf substituted b)' an nded COlllplaint on July 12, 195'1. Alter issue$ ha4 been Joined by tbe filing or detendant �s amende answer , cle.fendant raised tb$ issue ot the juri�cUct1on ot the Court or 1'1rst Ita.atance � ving round that it ba4 no 3ur1sd1ct1on to try the case, the said court ordered the coaplaint cliamissed. Froa the said or er, plaintitt' ap- pealed to t dupr~� Court. Th latter r1bunal in its decision ot ch 5, 19~ 1n G. � o. L-5692 (Sorso on Consolidated n1 Co. vs. Collector ot Internal Revenue) reversed the order ot dismissal and returned the records - ot the caaa to t court of origin tor further proee dings. owever, ~suant to Section 22 or epublio ct o. 112;, this ease vas r�manded to this Court tor tinal disposition. The issues in this cue aa;y be slliJIMariod as follows : 1 . Whether or not 1n the li&ht o~ section 306 or the Tax Cod this Court has Jurisdiction to determine plain- tift's refund claia for taxes alleged to haYe been il- legally or erroneously coll etc by def� dant; and 2. ether or not pla1ntltt is entitled on the er1ts to t retun4 of the afore-mentioned taxes paid, elative to the first question ot jurisdiction. in order that a taxpayer is entitled to a rotund of taxes, the taxp yer ust institute the ction in accordance with ection 306 ot tn. at1onal Internal evenue Code which 1s quoted hereunder: "S C. 306. �tcoxea ot ty tJ' - rqDegyslr qr llleglllz collecte~ . - o auit or pro4eeding shall be main- 357

� _,_ 358

o. 7? - 8- t at 4 t ot t tJ. io ot ' 1 , th r ha n re o'Vl r�i&llt t1o t t � lXpr sal.y - t1tu � c rt or r t Ir:aat 1 26, l9a. t r1 t e ot t or1 � 1, ~A clearlY c te hat t s til d ,. 26, 19 � � 1 proeM o ns r tt ltv r 1 plaintiff ! 9, 1~2 � - ot ai � 1 2, ot 1t� 11 b111ty i il-"~t1tf tn h 7, oo. 0 by c 1 0 41 r 1 1lo) - t to tt w c1r- , t 11 111ty or ct t re 1 ...,.......... y 1 t 9 2, pl tltt� tax 11 - U1 ot fi d t l tt r or 359

... � ( , fl 1c ,� 360

.- t �c u 1- - � � � .� 361

- 11 ...

-- � 1 ./ u l .] ( , ( I �� � � � � I � �� � � � 363

- 111 0 t 1 � ,.,� 1 � � � �� � � t.ult � f ' 361

- 1 .. � p f 1 � 1S � f � - h1 n , � 1 � t . . � lt � 't ~ � 0 365

l1A 1J �1 � "' - t� � 1� � - I � � � � 3 66

�1 � I generally: .. 367 )

� . ,- .. f � �� � � 1 � 368

� .- � .. ���� ��� � 1- 369

�l - �� � - s � 37 0

� .... � t 1- � � � �

- .... - 1 � 47 -21- � loss. nde~ the eire 1 ances, we ca ot ke th 1n 1nSJ at the ~� .In fact lost, t at ClrC stance al itself entttle plaintiff an ex t1on f 111 1- . Ae discuss ear11u, un � sa d ectlon 24 it of ~url ao Co. fol:' the 1ning fr the IIOIIMnt t e lnHil f~ es. n.. entl � t loss t reof su se ent o the extractl oduc~lon f 1 eve plalntl-ff of llabll1t for the ..!! a tax on th queet1on.J It foll wsthat the refund cla o nt of 14, 659. 7 � not 1� ant had l wfull collac ed fr plalnt1ff the tu� o ourth arter f 94tl, t c 1a1n o plalntlff for he r~ ver of the of 17, ~ 51.14 s alleged pald tax oul IS it ,. eb di ss d or lack of it, wlth coat a ainst pla nt ff. 6;[. ~ Gf 't-1>, 1'11). �' 372