STEFANINI PHILIPPINES INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY SPECIAL SECOND DIVISION STEFANINI CTA CASE NO. 10595 PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, Members: - versus - BACORRO-VILLENA, Acting Chairperson, CUI-DAVID, and FERRER-FLORES,l JJ. COMMISSIONER OF Promulgated: INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. ~�~ ' : :: ~'; x--------------- ~~~~~~T~~~ �~ -4-,:,------ -x CUI-DAVID, J.: This resolves petitioner's Motion for Partial Reconsideration (Re: Amended Decision dated May 7, 2025), filed on May 28, 2025, with respondent's Comment and Opposition (Re: Motion for Partial Reconsideration dated 2 8 May 2025), filed on June 17, 2025. Petitioner seeks partial reconsideration of the Court's Amended Decision promulgated on May 7, 2025, the dispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Review filed by petitioner is PARTIALLY GRANTED. Accordingly, the respondent is ORDERED TO REFUND or ISSUE A TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE in favor of petitioner the amount of Pl,558,507.41, representing the latter's unutilized input value-added tax attributable to its zero- rated sales for the 4th quarter of calendar year 20 18. SO ORDERED. Additional Member per Memorandum dated May 21, 2024.

RESOLUTION CTA Case No. 10595 Stefanini Philippines, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue X------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X Petitioner anchors its Motion on the following grounds: I. WITH UTMOST RESPECT, THE HONORABLE COURT ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING PETITIONER'S ARGUMENT THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO INCLUDE THE PHRASE "THIS INVOICE/RECEIPT SHALL BE VALID FOR FIVE (5) YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE PERMIT TO USE" DOES NOT APPLY TO OFFICIAL RECEIPTS GENERATED BY FLI BY WAY OF ITS DULY REGISTERED COMPUTERIZED ACCOUNTING SYSTEM ("CAS") AS PERMITS TO ADOPT CAS ARE VALID UNTIL REVOKED AND, ASUCH, DO NOT HAVE A FIXED TERM OR VALIDITY PERIOD; and II. WITH UTMOST RESPECT, THE HONORABLE COURT ERRED IN APPLYING SECTION 6 OF RR NO 10-2015, AS AMENDED BY RR NO. 16-2018, TO OFFICIAL RECEIPTS GENERATED BY FLI THROUGH ITS DULY REGISTERED CAS. In opposing petitioner's Motion for Partial Reconsideration, respondent invokes the Supreme Court's ruling in J.R.A. Philippines v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 2 which declared that "in a claim for tax refund or tax credit, the applicant must prove not only entitlement to the claim but also compliance with all the documentary and evidentiary requirements therefor." Respondent argues that petitioner bears the burden of proving its entitlement to the tax refund, and that any well- founded doubt as to its claim is fatal. After a careful and thorough evaluation of the arguments proffered by petitioner in its Motion for Partial Reconsideration, the Court finds that the issues raised therein have already been thoroughly discussed and disposed of in the assailed Amended Decision. WHEREFORE, there being no compelling legal argument raised that will merit reconsideration, let alone modification of the assailed Amended Decision of May 7, 2025, petitioner's Motion for Partial Reconsideration (Re: Amended Decision dated May 7, 2025) is DENIED, for lack of merit. G.R. No. 171307, August 28, 2013 [J. Per1as-Bernabe, Second Division]

RESOLUTION CTA Case No. 10595 Stefanini Philippines, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue X------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X SO ORDERED. ~~~ LANEE S. CUI-DAVID Associate Justice WE CONCUR: JEAN MA On Official Business CORAZON G. FERRER-FLORES Associate Justice