COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PAYMENTWALL INC.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ENBANC COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB No. 2510 REVENUE, (CTA Case No . 9727) Petitioner, Present: - versus - DEL ROSARIO, PJ, RINGPIS-LIBAN, MANAHAN, BACORRO-VILLENA, MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, REYES-FAJARDO, CUI-DAVID, FERRER-FLORES, and ANGELES, JL. PAYMENTWALL INC., Promulgated: Respondent. APR 11 2024 )(- --- - - -- - -- -- - --- - - - - -- - - - -- -- -- ----- -- --- - -- - -- - )( RESOLUTION REYES-FAJARDO, L.: For the Court En Bane's resolution is the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR)'s Motion for Reconsideration1 of the Decision promulgated on October 17, 2023, which denied his Petition for Review2for lack of merit. In the Assailed Decision, the Court affirmed the Decision 3 promulgated on July 28, 2020 and the Resolution 4 promulgated on March 18, 2021, both rendered by the Third Division of this Court (Court in Division) in CTA Case No. 9727. Previously, the Court in Division nullified the 48-Hour Notice dated September 14, 2017, 5-day VAT Compliance Notice dated October 4, 2017, demanding the payment of deficiency VAT in the total amount of P16,030,957.76, inclusive of increments, and the Closure Order SN: 1 Rollo, pp. 193-199. 2 Rollo, pp. 6-23. 3 Penned by Associate Justice Ma . Belen M. Ringpis-Liban with Associate Justices Erlinda P. Uy and Maria Rowena A. Modesto-San Pedro concurring. Rollo, pp. 30-63. 4 Penned by Associate Justice Ma . Belen M. Ringpis-Liban with Associate Justices Erlinda P. Uy and Maria Row ena A. Modesto-San Ped ro concurring. Rollo, pp. 65-71.

RESOLUTION CTA EB No. 2510 (CTA Case No. 9727) RRS-047-00SCO dated December 5, 2017, all issued against Paymentwall Inc. (Paymentwall). After Paymentwall filed a Comment5 thereon, the instant motion was submitted for resolution on January 11, 2024.6 After a careful review of the records of the present case, the Court finds no compelling reason to reverse or modify the Assailed Decision. In particular, the CIR maintains that the Court in Division had no jurisdiction over the case on account of Paymentwall's failure to exhaust its administrative remedy based on Revenue Memorandum Order No. 3-2009. However, this is the same argument already passed upon and discussed at length by the Court. To be sure, the CIR has not adduced any substantial argument to warrant reconsideration or modification of the Assailed Decision.? It is already settled that if the issues raised in the motion for reconsideration are mere reiterations of those which have already been passed upon and, in fact, adjudged as unmeritorious by the Court, these cannot be regarded as substantial and no longer require another full-blown discussion. s Any further discourse will only be unnecessary and repetitive.9 WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing considerations, the CIR' s Motion for Reconsideration of the Decision promulgated on October 17, 2023 is DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. ~~r.~-F~ MARIAN IW F. REYES-FAJARDO Associate Justice Rollo, pp. 210-215. 6 Resolution dated January 11, 2024. 7 Shnngri-ln liJfPmnfimwl Hntel Mnllngeiii('Jit, J.trl. (l, neurlnprrs GrnUJ1 nf Cnmprmies, luc., G.R. No. 159938 (Resolution), January 22, 2007, 541 PHIL 138-143. B Roque, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 188456 (Resolution), February 10, 2010, 626 PHIL 75-92. ' Socia/ Justice Society (SJS) Officers, et nl. v. Li/11, G.R Nos. 187836 & 187916, March 10,2015.

RESOLUTION CTA EB No. 2510 (CTA Case No. 9727) WE CONCUR: Presiding Justice -- ~- ~ '--- MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice c~�T- ..,4e-......-1~~- cATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice stice LAN~~1J!ID Associate Justice s Associate Justice HENRY j)�-NGELES Associate Justice