CTA Case No. 125 (Decision)

I 1 Ill I H II I I ... ~ .u k 1 ul� 1 � Al' '!!:AI-'� MA I'o ll.A - ru - �1 � f - -. --- ~ - ~ -- - ~ - [ tltl r yr fr of t l- f t c: 11 n �1 h n1 r c. � r y) 1n � / p 1 n r rc d - cr 122

A- � 12~ - -- �kp e1 out ol th - cr � e n er � atltlon 11 cl n ur u factor!� or t pc 1 t � n f ct r f - nd/o:r: pill 1 1�� h bl e. ny � c l ct r f Int r 1 evan � sent a la � 4, r c. ) nd! f 0 po ac ory, h ount o � 74 ax lts 0 1 fro 0 1 ~3. t with aurcbar � c ro isa n 1 y on h ry at th� petitio er 1 le for nf c tion 1 ln- tax pre~r -y ectt o 1 f � or tarnal evanue oda a f r non-p violated t t provls on of � ct on 1 3 n rel t1on to section 9 of tha Tax ode. ft r n xch of c nicatlon etw n t part ie , of Internal evenua on �bruary l � 95 isau a r�v1sad ����� ant ( xhtbit � p. 37, c.), 123 I1

� 12 -- re ~~ th nt d anded to 1 .~~7. � � salea ax o pe ltioner' aales of process d k pok fr ay :;.o, 1 54 to Sept , 19~ plus a reharg and e iae en lty detail foll a: � ���� ��� ���� � �������� � � TI � n arch , 195 , he etltloner ote r n nt, .re eatin for eeonsid atto of the �� ��� n t n that t aa ot a nufacturer nd further � ed to e 1ve the opportun ty o r t f t ee � r in e 11 o y �� -1 � � � � t tn a le ter l, l � I eeords) an reiterat d his d and for of th ���� s t. t1tloner nte instant petition for � ch f1 y �� ::>, 1 5 � � afflrma 1ve fe t t th l c- tion over the pe 1 on or re 1 � s ollo � rh ���� lnvolv n his ea the present p titton for r v! 1 an (2) h th petitioner is anuf c:t rer n eont pl t on of �� <�> section l of the at1onal ntunal even � Co elat!ve to the quest on of uris 1ctlon, el!eve t at t e prea n petition or r vi 1 .., .� 121

EC ~IG � . r. � c sa L � 12!) .... 4- within � r 1 entaxy eri of thirty ( ) days rovid for y law. The reco~d of t � case ahowt that the rev!s ����� ent !n est1on is dated t here la no ev1 ence �� to how and when th!a ����� ent was erved u on peti- tloner. iv n all ~ enef!t of the do in favo~ o be petitioner � y re th t the ����� ent was eceived, �t the latest on reh 9 , 19~ � the date of petitioner� � lett~ for recons!� deration of even ate (Ex 1b1t } was fileG t, reapon tntr without having conau ad any portion of the thirty- y period 1th1n whic to ppeal. fhe aental ther of ae a oy r spondent !n a l tter ated arch 1, c l tt r, ccordlng to test onlal evid nc prsaented by petitioner (H r- in o cto er 3, 195~) was reeeiv on Apr 1 11 or 12, 1955. Therefor , eountl g the per! r rli r ate pril 11, 1 55, n ental of the r - quea for r ion s c lv to ay 5, 1 ~~. the date of h fill of the pE ent p tttion for rev.lft, p ti ion r con'u only enty o r (24) aye, .ch is well within the r l ntary period reaeribed y s ction 11. ubl!c Act � 112~ and this Court can ta � co~ izanc� of this case. ah 11 now proc to consider a in question~ The awses t , rein 1 on c- t!ont 183 (A) nd 1 in rel tion o section 19 (x) of he Tax Co e. The r�� ondent a!nt int at pe- tlt!onar 11 a ~faeturer as ef!n in aection 125 ,~,

� 12~ -' - 1 4 (x) of he ~tion~l nternal evenue e an ita 1 le of t � procesae kapo !a au' jee to t � ax p.reacr1b in ect on l 6 the.r of. On the o er han � petitioner denies at it ia anu- faeturer and there or � u t t th 1 a tax ay not be o � pon 1 si ess. ection l 4 (x) o the x o e, ov r h1ch � aaue hinges. t t a� v ry nalyzin h fore o n provt ion, this ourt ha rule � ., . 12 6

� 12$ inner a b1tance of c- :.>,:~.�v lc o. 111, auppli � � of io a peti n ione � � .r l.y 1 al tio " ny one 1 ec:tion 1 )0 e Ta ~ ode, v % ho y any euc. (phy� ~al o 1~ 1) proc lt rt the ality y � c .r i r par !ally uf c:tur ao � t r u~� it to a:t � le � 1 or any o ~he es 1 '),.., rv I

� 12~ - 7- of 1 u trys" This � vation 11 or ra � by a rep rt o proe sa a a y� onra o Lotho, t e olo 11 Ina itu e o �c1 nee a T c nolo y .d 1 cl ln r� ort o � odolfo ::.r on, a r v nu n , fr w� ote� v de cr rly 1 1c t hat t � f lc n 1 ch n d y n of uch h t thie n to h k '1 el ned po , ereby al Uilag ita lity t le �h P� r pr f ny o stry and thus ec h ...! ( � i inct la of 12 ..

� 125 - 8- ).l 1 va. llettQr, ~2 o. � o. 16, p. 7 are ere x� of he opinten a o hold tl t pet! !onu s a nufacturtr aa defined n aection l 4 ( ) of the t1o al Inter al tvenue o � nd �� ch 11 1� ~~ t � '1 tax on its aale of roceaaed k po pre�cribed by section 186 thereof. ver, it. regard5 to the comproa1ae pen- lty l . 00 soug t to be coll ct fr ptt tioner, in extraJu icl l 1 t n o h� pan lty rescr!bed 1 aect!on 209 of .e Tax ode, � believe th t this our , n j risd1ctton to co pel petitioner to pay � a consistently held th t a c - r i very n tur pl1 a t1 oth part! l r d h ng o- !c . is o e r i . ( ifiaa oi . T. � o. 16, s pt. 14, 1955J Centr 1 z c.ar r T rl c vs. Coll tor, .T. � o. t J y '1 ) n choice o p yin or not payin it dis o p tlt:i n r. e!sicn o th oll& tor o Intvna even 1�1 d n hat � 1tlo er 1� h y or red to p y th� um of 1,4~7. � seles tax on l a ales of pr d apo r011 y to t C!l':' 'l 1ncl 1n sure ar �� 1 r speet to .o au of 100.00 �� anded a e pro iso pen l_y, tit on r !~ t l' erty to refuse o pay the � �� without �Judtce o the righ o rea on ent to 1 tt tute rocee 1 s or t � 129 lfJ. /

� 125 -- enforc en t �r o , �� � f cts and c!rc stan~�� ay w r r ent . ith co a gain t petition ~� � ' 1957. nile , h11 ppin s , ar � ., 1 3 0 /~