CTA Case No. 4529 (Decision)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY AF HO LDINGS AND MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, Petiti oner, - versus - C.T.A. CASE NO. 4529 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Resp ond ent . X- - - -X DE CI S I 0 N Thi s is a simple claim for refund by petiti o n e r in the amount of P3,508.32 representing cre ditabl e taxe s withheld from income paym e nts in the calenda r year 1988. This c ase at hand has been submitted for de c i s ion b a sed on the plea d ings and records of this case, sans the memorandum of b oth parties. The facts of the case are state d in the opinion of the petiti oner , thus: 2 . For the cale ndar ye ar 1988, petitioner f ile d an annual income tax return, a copy of which is her eto attached as Annex "A" and made a n

DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 4529 - 2- integral part of this petition, showing a refundable amount of P17,681.00 rep rese nting current (P6,500.00) and prior (P13,004.00) year's creditable ta xes withheld. Petitioner applied for a refund of P13,000.00 of the prior year's excess credita ble tax leaving a balan ce of P4.00 which it applied against its tax liability for 1988. Petitioner lik ew ise applied against it s 1988 and 1989 tax liabilities the cu rr en t excess creditable tax of P6,500.00 leaving a refundable balance of P3,508.32. 3 . On December 7, 1990, petitioner filed a claim for refund of P3,508.32 with the respondent; a copy of the aforesa id claim is hereto attached as Annex "B" and made an integral part of this petition for review. 4 . The prescriptive period for refunds for 1988 will expire on December 30, 199 0 but respondent has not been a ble to process the aforesaid claim; this p~tition for review is being filed to interrupt said prescriptive period. Hen ce , this petition for review. By way of special and affirmative defenses, respondent objected to the petition for review filed by the petitioner stating, among others, that "the petition states no cause of action as it does not allege the date/s when the alleged taxes withheld sought to be refunded were actually paid (Ha nu facturer's Bank and Trust Co., as Trustee of Gen. Trust Plan v. Comm. of Int. Rev., CTA Cas e No. 1059, No v. 19, 1 96 5)." Ho reover, "in a cl a jm 1 90

DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 4529 - 3- for refund, it i s incumbent upon petitioner to show that it is e ntitl ed thereto, otherwise, failure on the part of petitioner to prove the sa me is fatal to its claim for refund . " And lastly, " c l ai ms for refund," according to the resp ondent, "are co nst r ued against the claimant for it parta kes of th e nature of exemption fr o m t axatio n ( Co mm. of Int. Rev. v. Ledesm a , G.R. No. L- 17509, Jan. 3 0, 1970, 31 SCRA 95). Confident of the weakness of the petitioner's ca se , counsel for the respondent manifested in open cour t o n June 25, 1992 which later on was granted by the Court, that "she is submitting her case for decision on the basis of records and pleadings without the necessity of filing her me morandum." (See remarks of the Executive Clerk of Court, CTA r ec ord, p. 33.) The petitioner, however, submitted and offered as evidence the following exhibits, to wit : 1. "E xhibit 'A' - which is the in c om e tax return of th~ taxpayer for the cale ndar year ending December 31, 19 88 , including the financial statements prepared by Joaquin Cunanan and Co. Purpose: t o s how that in that year the taxpayer fil ed an income tax return showing an in co me tax due of P1,8 23 .00, various creditable taxes withheld of P6,500.00";

DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 4529 - 4- 2 . "E x hibit 'B' and 'B - 1' which are t h e ce rtifi c ates of creditable tax e s wit hh e ld a t s o urce, to show that Paseo Realty and Devel o pm e nt Corporati o n in payi ng a ma nagem e nt fee of P3,250.00 per se mest er in 1988, withheld a to tal a mo unt of P6,500.00 from the paym e nts due to the ta x payer. " 3. "Exhibit 'C' and 'C-1' to .show th a t the t axp a yer filed a claim for refund on De ce mber 12, 1990." (T.S.N., pp. 12-13 , Hearing of Oct. 22,1991.) The counsel for respondent , on the other hand, o bjected to the purposes for which the above e x hibits we re being offered or the grounds reli e d upon by the petitioner on this claim for refund. She averred that if ever there really was a withholding in the total amount of P6 , 500.00, "the b e st evidence of payment and remittance of which are the Central Bank confirmation receipts." ( T . S .N., p. 14, Hearing of Oc t. 22 , 1991.) Th e e viden c es at hand hardly gives us a leg a l groun d n o t e ven a logi c al one to grant the claim f or r efund as pra yed by the petiti o ner. The amoun t of P3 , 50 8 . 3 2 is n o t even r e fle c t e d i n any and all of the evidences offered by the petitioner. We cannot just make our �own wild co nj e ctures as to how the amount was arrived at wa nting the ne c es sa ry supporting docum e nts. Of l ct ��� uI

,� DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 4529 - 5- conrse , the petitioner does n ot expe ct t hi s Court t o g0 beyond eva luating evidences wh' c h are only at h a nd. In sho rt, the clai m for re fund f a ll s unde r the category of mere s elf-serving stipu lati ons ad v a n ced by the petitio ner . In a claim f or refund , as pointed out by the respondent , it is incumbent upon the p et iti o n er to show th at it is entit l ed thereto, o t h ervris e , fail ure on its part to prove the same i s fa t al to i ts claim f or ref und. Thi s is true si n ce claims for refund are co nstru e d strict ly . a gainst the c l ai ma nt for it p arta kes of the n at ur e of exemption fr o m t axat i on. ( Com m. of Int. Rev. v. Lede s ma, G.R. No. L-1 7509, Jan. 30, 1970, 3 1 SCRn 95. ) In the h ea ring o f this case on October 22 , 1991, petition e r averre d that a p art of th e P6,500.00 cred itab le tax withheld in 1988 was parti a lly a p p l ie d to its income li ab il ity in 19 89 . However, the 1989 income tax retu r n was never p re s e n t ed f or proper evalu ation a nd identific t i o n. Suc h d oc uments are wanting in support of the pet it ioner's case . IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, this Court hereby DENIES the claim for refund by the petitioner for

.. DECISION - CTA CASE NO. 4529 - 6- lack of merit. SO ORDERED . Que zo n City, tletro Hanila, Harch 16, 1 9 9 3 . ~<c~a. ~ ERNESTO D. ACOSTA Presiding Judge \tTE CONCUR: GRUBA Judge ~- ~~-L~ RAHON 0. DE VE A As socia te Ju ge I I CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this decision was reached after due consultation between the members of the Court of Tax Appeals in accord a nce with Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution. g~\.Q~ ~ ERNESTO D. ACOSTA Presiding Judge Court of Tax Appe als