CTA Case No. 1934 (Resolution)

"EPU"LIC �OF THE PHILIPPINEI COURT 'OF TAX APPE.A.LS QUEZO.N CITY ; A, C" �iARCHAD SCH , .eti t � oner , - versus - C. T�� CASE �Zo . 1934 C ISSIO JE OF r \TE AL REVEl'.!UE , Respondent . X- - - - - - - - --X An affirmative defense \vas raised by respond- ent in his answer c h all~n6ing t he jurisdiction of t his ourt to entertain t1e present appeal on t he . ground t hat it was file beyond t he 30- day period prescribed in Section 11 of epubli c ct No . 1125 . As borne out by t he r ecor ds and the evidence presented duri� g the prelimirar y hearing , the r ele- van t facts of t his c ase may be stated as follows: Cn l.larc h 2 ., 1 95'/, res pondent Co. td ss ioner of Internal 1evenue asse s sed and demanded fro m pe- tition er t he total auount of ;:.-24 , 589 . 90 , represent- ing fi x ed and percentage taxes , surcharges and com- promise penalty for t ' e years 1951 to 1955 . In a letter ~ated :~y 12 , 1958 , petitioner , f hrough his co uns~l , disputed the assessment and requested t hat res pondent desist from assessing and colle?ting t he aforesai d taxe s on t he ground t hat the ri ght of t he Government to asses s had already prescribed .

RE OLUTI I~ - CT CASZ -~ o . 1934 - 2 .- In his re9ly dated October 11 , 1967 , respond- ent denied petitioner 1 s request i n this vrise: . c cordingl - , your request t ha t t t:is Uffice desist fro r11 collecting the tax due f r om your client is '1ere- by denied . It is r e quested t hat you advise your client to pay the taxes herein refer red to wit in t en (1 ) days from receipt hereof and to in- for~ t hi s Office of t he payment also within the said per iod . Notice is hereby given to you that if the tax es in question are not paid within ten (l ) days fro ni your receipt hereof , t his Office will be const r ained to i n stitute i mediate judicial action against your client to effect collect- ion of the sai~ sum of ~24 , 5 89 . 9 0 with- out further notice o. ( "xh . 3, pp . 4'b-1+7 , BIR rec ., ~~derlining su� plied . ) This letter of res pondent 'llfas received by cow1.sel for petitioner on Gc ~ ober 28 , 1967 (Ex h . 4- , , p . 55 , BIH rec. ) and by petitio: er� himself on Fove:nber l , 1967 (Exh . 4- B, p. 55 , BIH r ec . ) . On December 7 , 196'7 , petitioner , t hrough coun- sel , objected to t e letter of respbndent datea Octo- ber 11 , 1967 and re quested reinvestigation of the case . ( xh . 4, pp . 54- 55 , BI. re c. ) This request i�Tas lef t unans\�le red by res9onuent . r- .stead , on January 30 , 1968 , res pond ent filed a co.nplai nt against petitioner for collection of the taxes i n question in the Court of irst Instance of hanila . The i n stant petition for revievJ was filed on June 8 , 1968 .

RESOLUTI N - CTA @.A .6 r~; o . 1934 - 3- ftes pondent contends t ha t thi~ Court ha s no jurisdiction over t he present appeal because it wa s filed on June 8, 1968 , whic h is beyond t he statutor y 30- day period from recei pt of res pondent ' s appealable decision on � ctober 28 , 1567 . Un the other hand , pe- t i tioner avers at.J t'; '.J...thefi ling in co urt , on January 30 , 1968 , of a complaint for collection of t he taxes amounts to a denial of his request for reconsideration and s hould be �c o�~ sidered the decision appeal a bie to t h ~s Court . Hence , co ~p uti ng t he per iod from hay 11 , 1968 , when he received the alias su1u11ons and copy of t he co uplain t , up to June . 8 , 1 968 , when he filed the etition for review, t he appeal ~as filed on time . The only issue to be resolved in t his incident is vr ether or n ot the instant appeal was filed Hithin the 30- day statutor y period presc r ibed in 8ection ll of �� ep ublt c Act Ko . ll2j . r:Je fi nd res pondent 1 s stand well taken o ( The as se s sr ent of res pondent Co .r issioner of I~arc h 20 , 1957 became a ndis pu ted1t assess ment when petition er r equested res p~ndent to desist fr o1a as- sessing and collecting the taxes as contained i n hi s letter of May .12 , 1958 . (St . Stephen ' s sso . V o Coll . of Int . ev . , 104 hil . 31~- . ) When res pond- ~nt denied petitioner ' s request in hi s letter of october 11 , 1967 , s uch a .denial con st i tutes t he

~ J.i' S LU'::I ' H - CTA C SE ~o . 1934 - 4- decision on the "dis putedH a ssessr.1ent , wl1i c h is ap- pealable to t his Court .) (Villamin v . C. T. � , L- :)-1596 , Oct . 31 , 196 ; angasinan Trans p . Co ., Inc . v . Bla- qu era , 107 :; il o 975 ; Filipinas Inv . 2: i~' inance Corp . v . Comm ., L- 235 . 1 , Lay 16 , 1967 . ) Inasmuc h as peti- tioner , t hr ough counsel , r ec eived this letter of der:.ial on Gctober 28 , 1067 and t he ir:.stant appeal was filed only bn June 8, L968 , it is obvious t~at ttle appeal -r.vas filed be.; ond t(1e 30- day period pres- cr i bed in l::iection 11 of Ite1Jc:,blic �ct Lo . 112? . �Tl:e req ues t of __,e't.;itioLer for reir:vest i t,ation of ,.i s C<::_se as c ontainea i~;_ ~:..is letter of .JeceJlber 7, 1 96~ does not ~ave the effect of sus pending the runni1::.6 of the statutorJ j_Jeriod for app eal because it was filed beyond 30 days fro m receipt of respond- en t ' s decision . n oti.~.er uords , itl~l.en petitioner re- quested reinvesti gation of hi s c ase on December 7 , 1967 , respondent ' s decision on the disputed asses$- ment had already become final and inc ontestable and no further 1��otion for recon sid era t i o.n or rsi1;.vest:L- t,c.ti o:c. could revive the same . (Luller Gc � hipps v . Cell ., 103 Phi+. 145 ; angasinan Transp . Co ., v . Blaquera , s upr a ; La az uen Viaje v . Cell ., CTA Case 323 , Dec . 27 , 1957 . ) This could be the reason wh- res pondent did not a.nswer pe0i tioner ' re que st f ilir reinvesti gat ion of hi s dec ision but instead

. ESOLDTl N - C'lA CAS~ Lo. 1934 5 instituted a co ~plaint in the Court of ir st Instance of Lanila for the collection of the taxes in question. ~l[.i.j~J.~.L..1U.J.i.i: , the petition for revie-vr is he reby disli.issed . uezon City , FebruarJ 4, 1970 . �:.__ ~~~-- � � u"~�. :_ . u:..ti:LI ~, residing J"udge � .~1-� L jA�~~~~� .L .tih ~ � 'v .i1�.L C .wl'. .~.ssoci ate Jua e /l