PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. PAZ S. ABAD SANTOS, Vicente Singson Encarnacion Corporation 2/F Don Vicente Singson Bldg., Bonifacio Market, Edsa, Monumento, Caloocan City (AT-LARGE)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CTA Crim. No. 0-270 Plaintiff, (XV-17-INV-12A-31) -versus- For: Violation of Sec. 49 (b) now Sec. 106 (A), Sec. 57 (B), Section 175, and Sec. 24 (B) (2) of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997 , as amended. Members: Acosta, Chairperson, Uy, and Fabon-Victorino, JJ. PAZ S. ABAD SANTOS, Promulgated: Vicente Singson Encarnacion Corporation, 2/F Don Vicente APR 1, ,n? ; 4:1qY'.t\1� Singson Bldg., Bonifacio Market, ~ Edsa, Monumento, Caloocan City (AT-LARGE), Accused. x-------------------------------------- -------- -------x RESOLUTION UY, .f..: On March 15, 2012, an Information was filed by the prosecution against accused Paz S. Abad Santos for vio lation of Section 49(b), now Sec. 106(A), Sec. 57(B), Sec. 175, and Sec. 24(B)(2) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, as amended, which reads as follows: "The undersigned Deputy City Prosecutor accuses PAZ S. ABAD SANTOS, of the crime of "violation of Sec. 49(b) now Sec. 106 (A), Sec. 57 (B), Section 175 and Sec. 24 (B) (2) of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended committed as follows: That on or about August 22, 2008, in Valenzuela City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there wil lfully, unlawfull y and feloniously fail and refused to fail tax liabilities in sums of Pl,615,303.98; I' P583,532.67; P69,061.06; P40,837.00; and P45 ,000.00 as deficiency income tax, VAT, EWT, DST, Final taxes and Documentary (Stamp) tax with corresponding interest of P852,424.23; P385,652.05;

CTA Crim. No. 0-270 Resolution Page2of4 P44,076.76; P32,710.43; P28,7 19(.00) and surcharges of P10,209.95 and P11 ,250.00 all for the year 2005, despite receipt of assessment notice and demand to pay said deficiency taxes from the (C)ommissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, which have become final and incontestable. CONTRARY TO LAW. Valenzuela City. February 23, 2012." Attached thereto are the following documents: 1) Resolution dated February 23, 2012 iss ued by Deputy City Prosecutor Honesto D. Noche, and dul y approved by City Prosecutor Hilda A. Fantastico- lbuyan, recommending the indictment in court of herein accused allegedly in her capacity as treasurer of Vicente Singson-Encamacion Corporation; 2) Investigation Data Form of the DOJ dated January 10, 2012 certified to by a certain Atty. Napoleon P. Campos, Jr. ; 3) Referral letter dated November 23, 2011 issued by Regional Director Tomas C. Rosales, CEO VI of BIR Revenue Region No. 5, Caloocan City, in behalf of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue pursuant to RDAO No. 2-2007, RAO Nos. 5-83 and I 0-95 , addressed to the City Prosecutor, Valenzuela City, to conduct preliminary investigatio n against accused allegedly in her capacity as treasurer of Vicente Singson-Encarnacion Corporation; with the following attachments a.) Affidavit dated November 23, 2011 iss ued by Atty. Napoleon P. Campos, Jr. , Legal Officer of Revenue Region No.5; b.) Affidavit dated November 23 , 2011 iss ued by Ms. Corazon L. Cruz, Mailing Clerk assigned at the Administrative Division of BIR, Revenue Region No. 5, with a copy of the Registry Receipt No. 1907 attached thereto; c.) Assessment Notices all numbered as Assessment Notice No. 177089 covering the taxable period 2005 issued against the corporate taxpayer Vicente Singson-Encarnacion Corporation, all dated August 22, 2008, inc luding the corres ponding Formal Letters of Demand attached respectively thereto (Annexes "A" to "] ", inclusive); d.) Undated Warrant of Distraint and/or Levy with A/R Case No. 027- 116-09 iss ued by Revenue District Officer Maridur V. Rosario, Revenue Di strict Office No. 27, Caloocan City, against Vicente Singson-Encarnacion Corporation (Annex "K"); e.) Preliminary Collection Letter dated October 30, 2008 issued by RDO Maridur V. Rosari o against Vicente Singson-Encarnacion Corporation (Annex "L"); and f.) Final Notice Before Filing Criminal Complaint dated March 14, 2011 issued by a certain Ferdinand M. De Leon, Chief, Legal Division of BIR, Revenue Region No. 5, Caloocan City, against accused all egedly in her capacity as treasurer of Vicente Singson-Encarnacio~ (I _ Corporation (Annex "M").

CTA Crim. No. 0-270 Resolution Page 3 of4 Based on the allegations in the Information, accused Paz S. Abad Santos is charged herein for Violation of Section 49(b), now Sec. 106(A), Sec. 57(B), Sec. 175, and Sec. 24(B)(2) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, allegedly due to her failure to pay tax liabilities in sums of Pl ,615,303.98, P583 ,532.67, P69,061.06, P40,837.00, and P45 ,000.00 as defici ency income tax, VAT, EWT, DST, Final taxes and DST, respectively, with corresponding interest of P852,424.23, P385,652.05, P44,076.76, P32,7 10.43, and P28,719.00, with surcharges of Pl 0,209.95 and P 11 ,250.00, all for the taxable period 2005 . Notably, these tax liabilities are corporate tax li abi lities of Vicente Singson- Encarnacion Corporation, but it is misleadingly stated therein that "the above-named accused, did th en and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously fail and refused to fail tax liabilities" without stating that these are corporate tax liabilities. Also, the basis for the assess ment of defi ciency taxes for taxable year 2005 against Vicente Singson-Encarnacion Corporation was not attach ed to the records of this case. On the other hand , in the Resolution dated February 23, 2012 issued by Deputy City Prosecutor Honesto D. Noche, and duly approved by City Prosecutor Hilda A. Fantastico-lbuyan on Ma rch 12, 2012, it is alleged that said accused is being charged " in her capacity as Treasurer of Vicente Singson- Encarnacion Corporation", the supposed corporate taxpayer in the instant case. A careful consideration of the supporting documents attached to the records of this case do not substantiate or prove that accused Paz S. Abad Santos is indeed the Treasurer and/or responsible officer of Vicente Singso n-Encarnacion Corporation. As a matter of fact, there was no ment ion of the name of accused as being part of the said corporate taxpayer in the fo ll owin g support in g documents: (a) the Assessment Notices all numbered as Assessmen t Notice No. 177089 covering the taxable period 2005, al l dated August 22, 2008, including the corresponding Formal Letters of Demand attached thereto; (b) the undated Warrant of Distraint and/or Levy~

CTA Crim. No. 0 -270 Reso lution Page 4 of4 with AIR Case No. 027-116-09; and (c) the Prel iminary Collection Letter dated October 30, 2008. The nam e of accused Paz S. Abad Santos was only mentioned in the "Final Notice Before Filing Criminal Complaint" dated March 14, 2011 as the addressee therein. Although in the Letter dated November 23, 20 11 addressed to The City Prosecutor of Valen zuela City sent by Tomas C. Rosales, CEO VI, Regional Director of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Revenue Regional No. 5, Caloocan City, it recommended the fil ing of criminal charges against PAZ S. ABAD SANTOS, allegedly in her o Cficial capacity as a treas urer and/or responsible officer, there is no appropriate showin g that accused Paz S. Abad Santos is indeed the Treasurer and/or responsible officer or Vicente Singson- Encarnacion Corporation. Furthermore, the offense charged fails to rel ate its commission w ith Sections 253(d) and 256 of the NlRC of I997, as ame nded, which wi ll provide the legal basis to charge accused for non-payment of corporate tax Iiabi Iities. All th e forego ing considered, the Court find s difficulty in making a judicious determination of the existence of probable cause to hold accused liable for the commission of the offe nse charged here in. Consequently, the Court is left with no recourse but to di sm iss the instant criminal case pursuant to Section 6(a), Rule 112 of the Revised Rul es on Criminal Procedure. WHEREFORE, premi ses cons idered, the above captioned case is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJ UDICE. SO ORDERED. EA!R~o~e2tUicYe WE CONCUR: ON Lt;:AVE