COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PERCEPTION GAMING, INC.

Republic of the Philippines COURT OF TAX APPEALS Quezon City En Bane COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB No.1431 REVENUE, (CTA Case No. 8449) Petitioner, Present: -versus- DEL ROSARIO, P], CASTANEDA, JR., BAUTISTA, UY, CASANOVA, FABON-VICTORINO, MINDARO-GRULLA, RINGPIS-LIBAN, and MANAHAN,Jl Promulgated: PERCEPTION GAMING, INC., d - :-�_-- Respondent. FEB 2 1 2018 1/�'<S"q .-. � X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X RESOLUTION CASANOVA,L_: Submitted before the Court En Bane is petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration (of the Decision dated 28 September 2017) 1 filed, through registered mail, on October 24, 2017 without respondent's comment as per Records Verification2 dated January 11, 2018. On September 28, 2017, the Court En Bane promulgated a Decision of the present case wherein it was held that the tax exemption privilege of the Philippine Amusement Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) extends tQz._. 1 CTA En Bane Rollo, pp. 128-132 2 lbid. , p. 137

RESOLUTION CTA EB No. 1431 (CTA Case No. 8449) Page 2 of3 PAGCOR's licensees and franchisees such as herein petitioner. The dispositive portion of the said Decision is as follows: "WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. Accordingly, the Decision dated August 26, 2015 and Resolution dated February 9, 2016 in CTA Case No. 8449 are both AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED." Undaunted, petitioner filed the instant Motion for Reconsideration. However, perusal of the issues and arguments raised by petitioner in his Motion reveals that he did not raise anything new to merit any modification or reversal of the assailed En Bane Decision. In fact, the discussions therein were copied and lifted from the Petition for Review3 filed with the Court En Bane on March 10, 2016. Accordingly, considering that no new matter was raised, and that the arguments in the instant Motion were already analyzed, weighed and passed upon in the assailed En Bane Decision, the Court En Bane finds no cogent reason to disturb the conclusions reached in the Decision dated September 28, 2017. WHEREFORE, petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. ~ CAESAR A. CASANOVA Associate Justice WE CONCUR: (I reiterate my Concurring OpinionJ ROMAN G. DEL ROSARIO Presiding Justice 3 CTA En Bane Rollo, pp. 5-12

. ~ESOLUTION CTA EB No. 1431 (CTA Case No. 8449) Page 3 of3 ~C-a..t--~,Q LOVEJ!a. BAUTISTA Associate Justice )'(JANITO c. CASTANED�, .JR. MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice Associate Justice E~.U.1' Y Associate Justice N.N. 0~ .:o0 ..LMr:J�u_(;'~ MINDARO-GRULLA Associate Justice CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice