CTA Case No. 5099 (Decision)
\~ I . _,-.:"'" REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY Af- HOLDHiGS At1D MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL C.T.A. CASE NO. 5099 Promulgated: REVEi'!UE, MAY 091996%- X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X DECISION 11 ���1� .11�,�=-' t"���t" =��.}�t� i.�...,-:,:.:-.:.=��.~ ij!i..T. ~�t*�.�.�-'t�.T,.�~�:�:-:~� rI�)�f�:�:l-'!1_".j..t1" �..._..~t1. . !~::�:' t�'.:-:,~._.a. 1.fl1 '-..' f..."~�'[J_J_f...l�~"... i '�.")��tT�-�.-.::l.rt)T,:�.:.JJ.ti��. i J. -.:.re�.:lita.ble ~,~.,rith1D1dinQ� t.G~e�:. f�)r t::c-::J.ble ve::lr 1qq 1. '-' I �� On ...::c..rril 1\ 1992, petiti(mer filed v..ritll the eureau c�f IntenE1.l Eevenu.::> its Cc�rpcrate Annua.l Income Ta.x RetFrn for the (5ro::::3 Income ( 1991) P l.OJO,Of)O.OO Le-:::::: Peducticrr:: (E:-11. i�.- 11) 1 0 1!) .:=;,'-) 7 .OC' Net Tax::�.ble ItE<�me (Ei11. A-4) l . r. r� QO\J
DECISION- C.I.A. CASE HO. 5099 -2- T:3.Z Du~ lE:::h. i�, -~,) p 24, 1.':>9.00 L>?�;�;: ;:J:' Pri':'r ;,oe::u-��; ex:>?% �:-redit b) 1)u.:uterlv r-. zrvments r -. ~ .6- 1�--~..(-l�. n-o- (E~1i:3. A-f.. E. t~ :C.-1) 6 C:,(Jl).OO �:) Cr>?..Jit::1.blt- Ta.x 'i,i1l"it.hl1d.J (E;.jE . �.::.. -9 .3-: C) :�: T;J_g EeflJ.nd;3_b1e 1� .��p...:.-.,, ..-). {.rc!.~..:t--ul D-1 ) . t,-. e. _. �-� � -� �- ___,,. ::>t�r����-�JJt�,r� ��r�� .:1.""' .!.��-�' __ !,,;. -� �-�� F)�..~...�_c.,_l lf.i_!.�I:__').�(-�i��{-�l '��-�11__1-._�. -----� tl_.1....::--:--. 1���---���lir.t.�._..f~�.�,,T.l.!l�-,. t�:::,:_i~':.:"..". r�r.:::.r�ll�t�=: t_��.-�._��.���tl1,1. tr-���.J--J-t._:,.:._:..�.--'l i:Jr.-:.-;'3 ItE�c�m>:> ( 1992) F� 6 ~~O.OOO.CtO Les:::: � De(!JJ.ctwns Net Lc��::;:. l 4(iC:, 1oc:, 00 oc:.. (p.~~.6C.i,l O,.)) Tax Due - N I L- 2c:. 1o.=~�. oo Le::;:;: Pt�l�..-��r �:j -~ ~7~�-..,t�'.:- ..-�t�~(ll�t l �,� 1_. '-�� I >=>'.T(�.:::.�=:�=: �,.� ~ ,_1 '�' "- &.'..� .,��_ -� '�' .... �� (�.EXli . D-2).� P 1?-..�_6;0--?�-.�- 00- b- .-'~ C....:n-L� -.:�l�t"f-.:-::.�t-1� V.. rt-,::-n./rtJ'!- .:-::011t-~:-:; iEyt�1:=; F.-�) E-g ,:<:.. E- ~(. �, I. ~ ....... - � :....;; .�.I ��� �' �-I. ' c) Cr-dita.ble. Tax 'vVithhe.ld :.o. (Exh. E-ll for .:=ml'v . 6 c:,oo.oo p .}.2 [)f)) p 2~�.l 06.00 u[.. c , ... 0 ll
DECISION. - C.T.A. CASE HO. 5099 -3 - UtE1.ble to apply tile ;:unount refundable of P U}.6CH}O(J. income ta;r for the ::;ucceeding taxable year ( 1992 ). petitioner filed :::~_ �written .::J:dm for refund on Februa.rv 2�;�,, 1qq4 (Exh. E-1) l �-�. �� ~,~lith the Revenue Re!=2-� "ional Direct()r c.f the BI.R. Petitioner is rn :-;:: ,-_.-~. 1(_) r.-.'.'. (_)(_)_, r�c-..�nrt���;::;.�c-�-�;-:�:�-:�.t�r� t....i..1�1::o:. ;�:-:�:....,..._..,.,.,���.~;�::;.._�~:�.c_.: r..�.t�c.-.~-..�.!1. t-=-t�b�-�fc�-�. "\,,�,,11.t-r� '�lf..-l�f-�;lr..lt.t�~�oc.- t~=_1_X-.;-:.._::=_; resulting to the �:)Verpayment. �:)f income t:.l.x for the years 1991 1"1(.1 1q q E) ;:::>!._. :. :- ,-.;~.,, ' t�.::.c�r-�.::.��-ti u '=�:�:'�1'~)'T {r.E-.:~.:~~J-1 . i. .L '�.� �-' _.L.... ���� .�..!.. y Respondent did not ;:Jet on such cla.im for refund. Hence, .� � r;r�t�1 1 ft�l.::.rl .Jt::�-r�t.t-i��,�....-,t-1�..'.". '!- .a. ��-� �- �q-�- r-�-.��.�:-�:.t1-� .t1-��'��-�)1�1 1�-�.-..�-�t� r�~�'-,'�.�a�.t�-c.�.tv\T.� ,,,.r1�t1�1 +t1-11.-c--� r._�.f�._�_l_l_lt-t.-, �-..-.�.�.t-1 ~ ,\ __.c >. r� J. refund. The petitkm is ho1Never lirnited �.)nly to the a.mount of r�> 1�;:..), ~�-=�-�.�.(..��,�~.�) ..(_J. (�Ji�, a-t�!�'=-::�'0o~�.-�..-_ll�)�y t��c._. .f-;-!�;:._:.:.�c-���c-�.1�1t�..�1-L,-;:,:.. C....'-��"'~�;-:�:.:_.. c�-����:-�� �..-...!-.._:.:t._��I1"..t.-3.11..!-.l.c_.. 'itVT1�.t.11�1L�r,t�'��-l"11-1,;-:,:-. .-,f �:�t�:,tc..-1 I!-l r��r-,-�:.c_�.Ir_�.�r-..;_.t.1c��-.�:�:�-.�, r�~r,�-:c._-.r1�_..-..�._�.t�-_lt�.�J'=��::�' t�! t.....; �'-�� .���-���-� t..t.�ik-f=.>..t. .t~--lLc.. ��._�.�t,~J.1�!-!1- 1� (-J.!- !-~--1� -1]1.1,.-..1 �.... rr--�. 1�P.), ,�_=.�. n�-� (�=)-. n�._. n�.� 1�..:-.. !L-,..1-. t.. f..�r!-'.�-���,tr-�'"=~."t�t�y� '��.�1��.�_�.....-_. .lJ.-!-I;I::.;,.!1t�-;�:�:-:�..~-.1. In an ::v::t.ion for refunr::l or t;.x credit the burden of proof is on tile ta.:xpayer to pro1le entitlement thereto othenvise. the claim 'i,o~lill be fat:.;.l. In this c::;se, petitioner failed to subrnit its l99Ct Incorne Tax Return to Petitioner repliwl tlEit 1t::: 1990 Inc(Hne T:;x Return ~Nas :Jtt::Jched t.c� its 1991 Ino)rne Tax Return V�then it filed :;;::tid ( 1991) Return 1A'it.1l the BIR :3s sh(:.i,V!1 in the filE rE>cords subr.nitted bv ' r�lt .-. 'l 1 1 I t-.-. tc tl� !::;'.c_.rr--�..�.v-�.t"\l_��l�-~�t-�i t.-�� De. t 1. nrl~t- rt-��,-r,�.-:�:.��-:��t.:-:.' _.t;'t_ �~- ��C--; ~�-� i7~ 1.���-lc.�-t�-1��.�,;..::�-:�. 1. (~�l 0 t"!U.)t"!-1f>.. �.�J -�' - !. �-� �-� �-� �-� - �-� Tax Return�::; ~Nitl1 :Jtt:v:lunents, consisting of: its T11ird Qua.rter -- -[ .,. l-, �~� vul
DECISiflH - C.LA. CASE HO_ 5099 -4- Incor.ne Tax Eeturn ic�r 19~~ 1. shovring p:3.yrnent of the :=-'.mount of 'lilithlleld ..!;J_ Source in the a.nwunt .:A P6,SOO.OO. ~Nit.hheld by P:::tseo Ee:::dty & Developtnent. Corporation (E;d1. C) and a1so its l c:�;�'�:,.k-., I�!.l-�...,.-.J.-!-I.L:.-. a.. T� �- v~�~.J'::::�:~'-t.lU 11 ,.._-~t�;��u\-l. [1. ,��,1�'.-.--.'1- t.-ll'to-~' f-�'1'--..-�, p e-.t- ~._.t,�. ~�:1l. lL�=:l,t�.f�t.-}-!i ,-.1- t��il b�,... ._J (f)Uft. r~:: petitioner entitled to the refund of P 1{;,60<\CH), covering the alleged overpaid in(:ome tax for 1991. r~sulting irorn excess credit.:tble ~A'ithholding taxes? The BIE re(:.:)rds ion<~t:t.rded to this Court form part of the ,��f I ��l !-o��~�.,�-~�-�,��-,r'.�..�1:~::-. �._.' t�l-�11.�c-�� �,��.�.��=�-1��cJo":�:":.". B): I Dr:.. 1� t.:�:.'-,-.-�.� t.�..�J�r�(.�..�J.c_�;.' 1� t t-,.~.,1�1�6rrt� .t:". L:_::,ll 11 -c-�~=~- ..i.. '�- '-' �c-��}�t,�.�-���.�t,;'l~�.~�......-~ t11~ '.r �-� 1991 In(:ome T::t.x Return of petitioner. filed on April l ::1, 1992. The f.:)1101..,ling documents '/lere att:v:hed to said return. narnely: ( 1) Audited Fin:3.ndal Statements_; (2) S(:hedu.le of Taxes and Licenses; (j) Photocopy of first page of prior vo&ar�s return ( 1990); (4) CerUfi(:a.to& of Credit.3.b1e Tax 'iNitllho&ld (Exl1. C\ and <:1) Schedule of refundable income tax. t... li''>c� t'tc- 7 Ail. l.�C-�� -;._"..�..;}��r�t��-~c.��,-����-�tl.~/Y f_-,.�-l-lt-� ��lTj Ir---�'t-=�'t-l�.tsl..-���-�-�-� �t��1-~� t- : r�,�-:�:�:-',c.,p..�r.��.�� ��t'-i.�"t:l::"~t�lt-� (.1.--~ �?:I. (-��c-��� �-p� ~T ..._~.f1� _._: 199r) Incorne Tax Eeturn. The original is in the custody and .�ll r�t� tli.:. ft" (�����t�Itr tr�l��� t�.::-c�r-' ����t�l�-I.:.r�lt 1.t�lc�t � t"Il Ci�::> \T1"1c�� ._..._.- �-� '�-� �-�� -� ~ ��-� �-� -� 1._.. l_ ��-� -� :?:T.C�.:I. �-� 'V :.J' -� -._. .:::>Pl. (l~ti,-.~ t' C� ,-. ~r-.,:,. ��I I --' �-� �' ._ �-� �._. --� �-' �._.. �-� ��-� '�- � t"li�., > V,T~ tr�l~f-.:::>f�.-��,t�;:::. <:":~.:::. n!-",;-~:�,t..;.-.1t.1-�� n���t�l~~�f- t ' �-� _, --� �-� �-� --� �-�, ._; �-� -... --� .---� �~-�(C;�C-i-�~t}t�� 1"v"a'-..;:.:-'.t.1C' :�(If"l ~.,\~7I"lT.'f c�}-l(llJl��} c-t<l1 �..! �� ... �-' .-.1. 1 In(:onw Tax t.he :-=-;�n-btnit-. ::--1� c- o� nl.- vI � (:.f it.c: qqo �� � - R~t.urn vlli~n � ~:ame - �- - -� . � � �' � -. r� (��f fBI '�=-�111�.�:�.-��::::>1.(�-!~I! rD-~. l"�t�:-;�.�,.�.�.��,��-�����t"<-"l�C-�.') �'-=''1-1�~~�-.-' t"!ll.t�-t�t:-:".-("-'�1.+ tJ-_.J ~,�l t�t ����t"t�I�l..:� H-1.,:,. �"l<"�(�JJ �-I-..:.fltc l._.. �-' rl'")�:I-:..I, �' ���� '!I ._..... ��-� '-.. -�' �-� .L L ��-�- _._: \ On the rn::1.t.t.o&r of the refund sou.Qlit. for in tlte ::J.rn�)Unt of =-~ �:.ltl"t'.)])�-;f�l 1-�,c�C� 1 tl}?t. 1) ... J' f:,(�,.::� (1(1 i t .�::i:�>t�r��-.rr-�-�.�.�-:�:c:...~. if"�C-�� .�. =:1. -� r--�����,-�.:-.� t1-.� t1�-�� ()!}�-~� f- ,_,_ -� -._. -�6 l�r-�- �C-��J-l��!�t-~�-t��,c��,-�,.�__l.,. c~�. ~--� �-'�-� � ) �' ��-� ��-� ( ) . �-�� �-� .z .... :_ �
DECISIOB- C.T .A. CASE RO. )099 -5- in 1992, tried to credit sa.id arnount of P lf\.60{i.OO Vlitll it<:; credit:dAe v'lithh(:.lding tax f()r 1992 in the a.rnou.nt of P6.500.00. T.�-:L�:..~. F.'t--?t.llJ�!�1. EH--i~,1-�,.�.:.t..�_:�..Lc� �c-��}-L,.-.,U1,�.-�1 1.����.�;-::�. H1-.�3- .�,...-1;�:-:�. ~.--.�,-I-l t,l�L"' !H--._�:l.J�1r~ (.1��[ ��,, 1.1-f ,..��11�t.�.�..�<�::.t-. t-1��!1l0::� .,,-. ���r�;::.,.�JI�t tl� � � ��r�� ��1� t::t�"" t-l�-!d~.t-� �-� 11:::' �:1. I!'-��.�!1-�1t1-r�.. !._) ,r-,�..:�::,.c)-, tri�-~��=�-.).�.(_'J(�-) �.-:�-t�.i:~.lllt��)�!�:;�:' ��-:.~r--�'f--�lli�;�:-:�.'���-I �:>..:> ��-:~. -�-�..::.. --� v �- -� t�-��~-j the succeeding tax::Jble vear. Ho~~1ever.. p:etit.ioner failed to :_1 I not the sarne has :::v~tua11y been applied as a t:~.x credit in its itKome t:J.x li::.t.bility for the year 199.3 or ~Nhether it suffered a ���1,.-;c�-=: f..-�.r tlpt �~��_r._.��-���.�c-:�'q- .t.&1. 1 P- ~l.��...c.::_.�.qr . This document is vita.! i�:::.r t11e resolution �' v���1� 1n..;:�:-�.t.l..t.1.�,�..-�,1-it~?t�'c._-. ~�-���l�C=.'."t�r1--1 !������.1� 1� t�.:'�::�:.t-1�1.1-Lrl 1�l��:J ~�,11.!1'b' . -1 (-,~1r) t.r.-:�:;.._ t-<���1-� J-J��c-;'�:�:�. t�-l�-L;::. r�;..:.:.tllf~?('..l+~I:'r �'.1}- (:arrv' -over. As '�"le ll=J.ve ruled in our Resolution. dated October . 2 1, 199.1. in a Motion for Reconsideration presented by the Cor.cunissioner of Internal Revenue in the case of Paseo Realty Development Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. CTA Case No. 4693, pertinent porti~)n of r.,.vhich are "/�, r-:�unctilious ::Jud'v of t.11e case at ba.r.. reveais that ind-?.ed U1ere is a c:ltt:::;e t(:. reconsider Our previous Decision. 'vVe have overloot.ed the fa.ct that petith::.ner's 19(:i9 Corporate Inu)me Tax Return (EYJl. A) indicated tJ1a.t the amount of P54, 104.00 subjed of petitioner's claim for refund has already been included as p;:J.rt and parcel c�f the J? 172,477.00 V�lhi(h the petition.:-r aut~)matically applied as ta.x credit for the :::ucceeding taxable year 1990. Note should be taken that the a.mount of p~.4 104 ()() � i-=�--' ;-:�'jlfP..?- �!.(l ~/T part and parcel (1f -�� .I �- - tLJ.0."''-'-'
DECISIOH- C.T.A. CASE MO. )099 -6 - no alreadv 1 whid�� '7} 4'7'7 1:::. - I - } ..... ' f � " ~ � � ... L In-r~.c.. ;-H-t� r�.1D!..t. ..iv~-l'l! '1W-l�c-; ' applied as tax credit to the suc(:eeding taxable year 1990 Su(:h presu.mption. of course. could have been overturned had the petitioner su.brnitted its 1990 Corporate Income Tax Return showing tlla.t it rJid not ;3_utonB.tic::lllv t.:rHlit the ~;aid a.mount f�.)r tlie said taxable vea.r' 1qqo_ Uniortmla.tel'l. p�etitioner failed r -- 1 �� t..-) submit that vital document ~Nhich (:OUld have unloo:::l(.e(l his entitlement f(;.f tlH~ elusive daim for refund souQ1_,�ht for. Fai11_1.re on the 11-:>art of thE> petitioner tx) sust:lin lus dairn is fat:;J to its Gause iroe1f1uovn..rdim_�-r�artehe time-tested doctrine t11at I claim:::; for .::onstrue(l strictlv against daimant �-� (Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Ledesma, G.R. No. L-17509. January 30. 1970. 31 SCRA 95). r .. R. �-� ;:. tr� t��TT 1,/o. ,-. l '��~����-�r' �t�f�-~�r�"-��.t.� l~T 1r-)1�-1t... -�' tll-~~� ~r-nr�-�-�.l. tlr�l-~t�-�-11:., .._J 0C~"f:":t".t�lt. -::: petitioner's refund despite tlle fact that said amount v..ras applied as tax credit by petitioner in tlw taxable v' e;3_r 19Q-O.. is detrimental tl.) tlle interest of t11e tr, r.~J..�--�l~lTe-.:_..rr�lr�r�le�._:..t�tt-� �-----1�=,--. t-t��1~e�-:-.� �._=.;�;,�.!",'t�I�I�-~� 1-�c--' t-"~--.'1.t�lt--'-"~---'.t�I!�. ��-r� i-l�ltlt.... -��-� 2i:j:�r��a�-t�tt1..�rJ�. l,-;.:-:, petitkmer tv-lice the refund ~)f tlle same atm:mnt." In ::t. more recent case dedded by the Court oi Appeals, it ��a is incumbent upon the petiticiner t(i sllo~hT proof U1at it l1as not credited to its 1990 Annual Income Tax Return, the amount of F�297,492.00 F' 11"/ 1 r-r, -:�.;:- tn il.!"1("11Vli"t-li=1 nnl l"t�=- ---=- ~q '1..1 _. .l -� 0 1-~rnt~ . �-� �-� �� , ,:. �-� t,;;.._� ~--- ��-� !n�r'�~~�-T�l�'I.--...,. n�-- !, .... -- �- �-� -- �-��-� dedan.l.th:m in tile 19<39 Income Tax Return that tlH sr1id P2 Q7 4(J2 oo (�inc-:ludin2,_�t P 112 4q l oo) v..rill b~ -� - -� J - �� � I �� � � � - ��::�>.rn-�nr1-�1�,::�,-.�-��-1 �--~-t��-=�� ��:-1� t�--�:-:-1�y~ .�--���r,.:,:,�.��it"t~ 1�1�1 t-l��I,:�:-,- ��=--�J--lf�Y-� �-'�,:�-:�,,,.::,�-.-�lt.tlca� T>r<�,:.>��::\>r� ...-,,r� 1990. Having failed t() submit such requirement. there is no basis t!) 0arant tlie claim for refund. xxx." (BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc .� vs. Hon. Court of Tax Appeals. and Commissioner of Internal Revenue, CA-G.R. SP No. 34240, March 31, 1995~ Petitioner�~:; f'...'lotion for Reconsideration Vola~:;
DECISIOH- C.T.A. CASE HO. 5099 -7 - denied by the Court of J.LJ..ppe::1ls in a Resolution. da.t.ed �rr~ove.r.n1::.e.r �.�), , : - _ __ l(~J(�,.t:_..�� ). Thus. the Court Ulnnot l)e left t(:. speculate as to 'qhether credited or not to the succeeding taxable year ( 199_3.). For if so, then the amount of P U}.60;}00 c:::HU10t be granted in favor of petitioner F:3.ilure on the p::).rt. of the taxpayer to su.st:1.in hi:; claim i:; L1.tal to its c::tuse of action. T:::txe:::: are presumed to have been collected in ;;:l_ccordance Vv'"ith lavls a.nd regulations. (Caltex (PhiL) Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. CTA Case No. 2871, January 29, 1986.1 A refund partakes of tl1e nature of an exernption.. and the sa.me are construed strictly again:;t t11e claimants. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Ledesma. 31 SCRA 95J WHEREFORE, in vievl of the foregoing_. the petition is hereby DISMISSED for insufficiency of evidence. Accordingly, petitioner':; claim for refund is hereby DENIED.. v~~"it11out. speci:::tl SO ORDERED. i(J.�.s. �.�l.
DECISIOH- C.T.A. CASE HO. 5099 -8 - WE CONCUR: c;L~(Q~ ERNESTO D. ACOSTA Presiding Judge ~<:4.~ MANUEL K. GRUBA A::;<;cc,.j;.:tte Judge CERTIFICATION '! h>:>rebv certifv tllat. this decision Vla::: re::J.ched :3.fter due' consu.lt3.tion ::;.mong the members of the Court of T::u~ Appeals in ac(:ordance w1th Se(:tion 1J. iH"tide VI II of the Constitution. ~Q'-~ ERNESTO D. ACOSTA Presiding Judge (.(:ru.rt c�f T:;.x Appeals
More in CTA Decisions
- BONIFACIO GAS CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8794)
- CTA Case No. EB CRIM-71 (Decision)(CTA Case No. EB CRIM-71)
- ANTAM PAWNSHOP CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 131)
- MONTE SOLAR ENERGY INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10434)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. ACCENTURE, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 410)
- FILIPINAS PALMOIL PLANTATIONS, INC., v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 550)
- CTA Case No. 1030 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 1030)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. ATLASSIAN PHILIPPINES, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 2654)
Want an analysis of this document?
Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.