WELLCARGO CUSTOMS BROKERAGE, INC. (represented by its President MARIA B. ZAPATA) v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR)

CTA Form No. 8 (For DCC) 11111111111111111111111111111111 11111 1111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111 22-000138-0043 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION CTA CASE NO. 10817 WELLCARGO CUSTOMS BROKERAGE, INC. (represented by its President MARIA B. ZAPATA), Petitioner, -versus- NOTICE OF RESOLUTION COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR), Respondent. To: OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL 134 Amorsolo St., Legazpi Village Makati City ATTY. RAMON B. LORENZO ATTY. ROWELL B. VICENTE ATTY. MYRNA R. SANTELICES ATTY. KRISTINE ALMA T. CAYABYAB Bureau of Internal Revenue Legal Division, Revenue Region No.6 5/F, BIR Building I, Solana Street Intramuros, Manila ATTY. TORENIO C. CABACUNGAN JR. Unit 1804-B, New York Mansions Montreal & Annapolis Street Cubao, Quezon City GREETINGS: You are hereby notified by these presents that on June 17, 2025, a Resolution was rendered in the above-entitled case, copy of which is attached hereto. Quezon City, Philippines, June 20, 2025. Atty. Maria J~ Chan-Te Executive ~urt II

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION WELLCARGO CUSTOMS CTA CASE NO. 10817 BROKERAGE, INC. Members: (represented by its President MARIA B. ZAPATA), Petitioner, -versus- DEL ROSARIO, P.J., Chairperson, BACORRO-VILLENA, and CUI-DAVID, JJ. COMMISSIONER OF Promulgated: INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR), Respondent. }{- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - H TUn'I�V - RESOLUTION CUI-DAVID, J.: For resolution is the Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated October 2, 2024) [Motion for Reconsideration], filed by respondent on October 28, 2024, with petitioner's Comment on the Respondent's Motion for Reconsideration, dated 21 October 2024, filed on January 20, 2025. Respondent seeks reconsideration of the Court's Decision dated October 2, 2024, which granted petitioner's Petition for Review. The dispositive portion of the assailed Decision reads: WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing considerations, the in~tant Petition for Review is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Formal Letter of Demand, Final Assessment Notice No. 30-12-90196-2021-084(1T), and Final Assessment Notice No. 30-12-90196-2021-084(VT), all iss~ed on March 11, 2021, are CANCELLED and SET ASIDE. Furthermore, the Final Decision on Disputed Assessment issued on February 18, 2022, assessing petitioner for

RESOLUTION CTACaseNo. 10817 We!lcargo Customs Brokerage, Inc. (represented by its President Maria B. Zapata) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (BIR) X------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X deficiency income tax, value-added tax, surcharges, and interests for the taxable year 2012 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Respondent is ENJOINED and PROHIBITED from enforcing the collection of the subject deficiency taxes during the pendency of this case. SO ORDERED. Respondent argues that the Court lacks jurisdiction over petitioner's Petition for Review, that its right to � assess petitioner's alleged deficiency taxes has not prescribed, that the assessment has factual and legal basis, and that petitioner was not denied due process. Conversely, in its Comment, petitioner maintains that the Court was correct in holding that it has jurisdiction over the Petition for Review, that the issuance of the Final Assessment Notice and Formal Letter of Demand (FAN/FLD) exceeded the three-year period prescribed under Section 203 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, as amended, and that respondent's failure to issue a Notice of Informal Conference (NIC) or a Notice of Discrepancy (NOD) constitutes a violation of its right to due process. We discuss. Records reveal that respondent, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Legal Division, received the Notice of Decision on October 8, 2024. Section 11 ofthe Republic Act (RA) No. 1125, 1 as amended by RA No. 9282,2 provides: SEC. 11. Who May Appeal; Mode of Appeal; Effect of Appeal.- ... All other cases involving rulings, orders or decisions filed with the CTA as provided for in Section 7 shall be raffled to its Divisions. A party adversely affected by a ruling, order or decision of a Division of the CTA may file a motion for AN ACT CREATING THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS. AN ACT EXPANDING THE .JlJRISDICTION OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS (CTA). ELEVATING ITS RANK TO THE LEVEL OF A COLLEGIATE COURT WITH SPECIAL JURISDICTION AND ENLARGING ITS MEMBERSHIP, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE CERTAIN SECTIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. I 125. AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE LAW CREATING THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

RESOLUTION CTA Case No. 10817 Wellcargo Customs Brokerage, Inc. (represented by its President Maria B. Zapata) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (BIR) X------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X reconsideration or new trial before the same Division of the CTA within fifteen (15) days from notice thereof: Provide, however, That in criminal cases, the general rule applicable in regular Courts on matters of prosecution and appeal shall likewise apply. .. . [Emphasis supplied] Accordingly, respondent had 15 days from October 8, 2024, or until October 23, 2024, to file a Motion for Reconsideration. However, respondent filed the Motion for Reconsideration only on October 28, 2024, five (5) days beyond the deadline. Given the belated filing of respondent's Motion for Reconsideration, the assailed Decision dated October 2, 2024, has become final, executory, and unappealable. Consequently, the Court no longer has jurisdiction to entertain respondent's Motion for Reconsideration. WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, respondent's Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated October 2, 2024) is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. irMJAA~ LANrfl'[_v6~I-DAVID. Associate Justice WE CONCUR: Associate Justice ( JEAN MARl