COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. GREENLEE CP ELECTRICAL CORP.,

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ENBANC COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL CTA EB NO. 2821 REVEN UE, (CT.A Case No . 10043) P etitio n er, Present: -versus - DEL ROSARIO, P.J., GREENLEE CP ELECT RICAL RINGPIS-LIBAN, CORP. , MANAHAN, BACORRO-VILLENA, Responden t. MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, REYES-FAJARDO , CU I-DAVI D , FERRER-FLORES, and ANGELE S,]]. ){- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - ){ RESOLUTION RINGPIS-LIBAN, .l: This resolves Petitioner's ".iYiotion for Reconsideration [Re: Decision dated September 19, 2024]"1 ("Motion for Reconsideration") filed on October 11, 2024, with Respondent's "Comment (To Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration)"2 ("Comment) filed on D ecember 05, 2024. Petitioner's Motion fo r Reconsideration prays for the reconsideration and setting aside o f the Court En Banr!s D ecision3 dated September 19, 2024; and the rendition of another decision ordering Respondent to pay the am ount of Php23,792,523.40 representing the 2014 deficiency assessment for income ta){, value-added ta){, e){p anded withholding ta){, fringe benefit ta){ and documentary stamp ta){ plus twenty percent (20%) deficiency and delinquency interest p er Rollo, pp. 105-120 . .rV' 2 Id., pp. 134-138. 3 Id., pp: 85-103.

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2821 (CTA Case No. 10043) annum until December 31, 2017 pursuant to Sections 248 and 249 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, as well as twelve percent (12%) interest on the total unpaid amount computed from January 01, 2018 until full payment thereof pursuant to Section 249 (C) of the NIRC of 1997 as amended by Republic Act No. 10963, otherwise known as the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) and as implemented by Revenue Regulations No. 21-2018. The dispositive portion of the Decision promulgated by this Court on September 19,2024 reads: "WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Review filed with the Court En Bane on l'\ovembcr 20, 2023 is DENIED for lack of merit. Accordingly, the Decision dated June 21, 2023 and Resolution dated October 13, 2023 in CTA Case No. 10043 are AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED."� In his J\Iotion for Reconsideration, Petitioner contends that the Special First Division has no jurisdiction over the original petition since Respondent failed to file a valid protest to the Formal Letter of Demand ("FLD") / Final Assessment Notice ("FAN"), making the assessment final, due and demandable. Moreover, the 30-day period must be reckoned from September 18, 2018 when the \'Varrant of Garnishment was received by the Bank of Philippine Islands ("BPI"), and not on January 31, 2019 which Respondent alleged as the date it was informed bv BPI of the warrant. A.lso, Petitioner insists that the Petition for Review filed with the court a quo is insufficient in form, the Secretary's Certificate showing that it is not the directors of Respondent who gave the authority to Charles C. Yao to sign and to represent it, but a certain Greenlee Facility Solutions, Inc. Petitioner further maintains that assuming argmndo that the Court can exercise jurisdiction over the original case and that the original petition is sufficient in form, Respondent failed to show the incorrectness of the subject assessment. "-\ccording to Petitioner, tax assessments by examiners are presumed correct and made in good faith, following the doctrine of presumption of regularity. Lastly, Petitioner avers that the Court En Bane erred in affirming the ruling of the Special First Division which held that Respondent was not accorded due ,./ 4 !d., Decision dated September 19, 2024, p. 102.

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2821 (CTA Case No. 10043) process for the failure of Petitioner to prove valid service of the Preliminary Assessment Notice (PAN) and FLD/FAN. On the other hand, Respondent, in its Comment, asserts that it could not have filed any protest concerning the disputed assessments considering that it never received any FLD/FAN. .Additionally, Respondent points out that the proper Secretary's Certificate to correct the initial defect in CTA Case No. 10043 was submitted on june 13, 2019 and was deemed as substantial compliance by the Special First Division, as supported in the case of i\1edian Container Co1poration v. ~Met1vpoiita11 Bank and Tmst Compm!l� Finally, Respondent contends that it docs not need to prove the incorrectness of the disputed assessment, as there was no valid assessment to speak of, a consequence of violation by Petitioner of Respondent's right to due process. \'Ve resolve to deny Petitioner's 1Iotion for Reconsideration for lack of ment. The arguments raised by Petitioner in its motion are mere recapitulation of the arguments raised in its Petition for Review filed with this Court. In addition, these issues have been amply considered, weighed and resolved in the Decision promulgated on September 19, 2024. Thus, We shall not belabor, in this Resolution, to repeat the disquisitions made therein. In sum, the Court En Bane finds no cogent reason to overturn the Decision dated June 21, 2023 and Resolution dated October 13, 2023 of the Special First Division. WHEREFORE, pretruses considered, Petitioner's "1\Iotion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated September 19, 2024)" is DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. ~. ~_.-,; \,______ MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice 5 G.R. No. 166904, August 11, 2008.

RESOLUTION CTA EB NO. 2.82.1 (CTA Case No. 10043) WE CONCUR: Presiding Justice ~. 7- A~�. . . .-o4'1.~-- cATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice f' � ~ ~ r~-P~rNk. MARIAN IviJr:. REYES-FAJARDO Associate Justice ~f/A: LANEE S. CUI-DAVID Associate Justice s Associate Justice HENRY iPANGELES "\ssociate Justice