BASES CONVERSION AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY SECOND DIVISION BASES CONVERSION AND CTA CASE NO. 8263 DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, Members: Petitioner, -versus- UY, Chairperson, BACORRO-VILLENA, and CUI-DAVID, JJ. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL Promulgated: REVENUE, MAR 30 2023/ Respondent. '1: ){- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -~ - - - - -){ rJ ;; �� . RESOLUTION On February 16, 2011, petitioner filed via registered mail a Petition for Review with Request for Exemption from Payment ofFiling Fees (Petition for Review), praying for the refund of the amount of Php22,523,688.30, allegedly representing Creditable Withholding TaJC (CWT) paid under protest on 9 March 2009, 10 March 2009, 14 May 2009, 25 February 2010, and 21 April 2010 in connection with the sale/disposition of BCDA-allocated units as its share in the "Serendra Project" located in Fort Bonifacio, Taguig City. On February 3, 2012, the Former Second Division issued a Resolution in the above-captioned case, dismissing the Petition for Review, as follows: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the present Petition for Review is hereby DENIED DUE COURSE, and, accordingly DISMISSED for non-payment of docket fees. SO ORDERED. On February 21, 2012, petitioner moved for reconsideration, which was denied in the Resolution dated April 13, 2012.

RESOLUTION CTA Case No. 8263 Bases Conversion and Development Authority vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x Petitioner's appeal before this Court's En Bane suffered the same fate when the latter issued a Resolution on October 10, 2012, the dispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Review is hereby DENIED DUE COURSE for lack of merit and is, accordingly, DISMISSED. SO ORDERED. Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration was likewise denied in the Resolution dated December 11, 2012. Hence, petitioner elevated its case before the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review, docketed as G.R. No. 205466. On January 11, 2021, the Supreme Court rendered a Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby GRANTED. The October 10, 2012 and December 11, 2012 Resolutions of the CTA En Bane are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. This case is REMANDED to the Court of Tax Appeals for further proceedings in CTA Case No. 8263. No pronouncement as to costs. SO ORDERED. On November 2, 2022, the Court En Bane received the Entry of Judgment of the Supreme Court, stating that the Decision dated January 11, 2021, has already become final and executory. Thus, on December 6, 2022, the Court En Bane issued a Resolution remanding the case to this division for further proceedings. On January 10, 2023, following the Supreme Court's Decision dated January 11, 2021, this Court issued a Resolution setting the case for the continuation of the presentation of petitioner's evidence on April 12, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. On January 31, 2023, however, the Court received a Motion for Leave to Withdraw Petition filed by petitioner through registered mail on January 6, 2023. In its Motion, petitioner asked the Court that it be allowed to withdraw its

RESOLUTION CTA Case No. 8263 Bases Conversion and Development Authority vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x Petition for Review given the utilization/ application of the CWT sought to be refunded in the present case to the payment of its corporate income tax. On February 2, 2023, the Court issued a Resolution directing respondent to file his comment to petitioner's Motion for Leave to Withdraw Petition within ten (10) days from notice; after which petitioner's Motion shall be deemed submitted for resolution. On March 22, 2023, the Judicial Records Division reported that respondent failed to file his comment on petitioner's Motion for Leave to Withdraw Petition. Hence, We resolve. Finding merit, and there being no objection registered by respondent, petitioner's Motion for Leave to Withdraw Petition, is GRANTED. WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review is deemed WITHDRAWN, and the instant case is considered CLOSED and TERMINATED. SO ORDERED. ERL~P.UY Associate Justice "="" ... iate Justice L.JAAAtrhtf._ LANt.ff'K_VbUI-DAVID Associate Justice