ZMG WARD HOWELL, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY FIRST DIVISION ZMG WARD HOWELL, INC., CTA Case No. 10451 Members: Petitioner, -versus- DEL ROSARIO ,P.J.,Chairperson, MANAHAN, and REYES-FAJARDO, JJ. COMMISSIONER OF Promulgated: INTERNAL REVENUE, SEP 1t"22.0::251 ;>'Yl Respondent. (/VI?~ )(- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ){ RESOLUTION On February 15, 2021, petitioner filed its Motion to Withdraw Petition for Review stating that upon further evaluation of the case, petitioner has decided not to pursue the Petition for Review filed with the Court. Respondent, in his Manifestation with Motion for Further Extension ofTime to File Answer, posted on March 26, 2021 and received by the Court on May 21, 2021, manifested no objection to the withdrawal of the Petition for Review. The Motion to Withdraw Petition for Review is granted. The Supreme Court has discussed the procedure for the withdrawal of pending appeals before the Court ofT~ Appeals (CTA) , as follows: A perusal of the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals (RRCTA) reveals the lack of provisions governing the procedure for the withdrawal of pending appeals before the CTA. Hence, pursuant to Section 3, Rule 1 of the RRCTA, the Rules of Court shall suppletorily apply: Sec. 3 . Applicability ofthe Rules ofCourt. - The Rules of Court in the Philippines shall apply suppletorily to these Rules.

RESOLUTION CTA CASE No. 10451 Rule 50 of the Rules of Court - an adjunct rule to the appellate procedure in the CA under Rules 42, 43, 44, and 46 of the Rules of Court are equally adopted in the RRCTA- states that when the case is deemed submitted for resolution, withdrawals of appeals made after the filing of the appellee's brief may still be allowed in the discretion of the court: RULE 50 DISMISSAL OF APPEAL XXX XXX XXX Section 3. Withdrawal of appeal. - An appeal may be withdrawn as of right at any time before the filing of the appellee's brief. Thereafter, the withdrawal may be allowed in the discretion of the court. (Emphasis supplied) 1 Based on the foregoing, the withdrawal of the appeal may be allowed upon the discretion of the Court. Thus, considering that the instant case has not yet been submitted for decision and considering that respondent has no objection to the withdrawal of the petition, the Court grants petitioner's Motion to Withdraw Petition for Review. WHEREFORE, petitioner's Motion to Withdraw Petition for Review is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Petition for Review filed on January 15, 2021 is DISMISSED, and the case is considered CLOSED and TERMINATED. Respondent's requests for extension of time to file answer, as stated in his Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer and Manifestation With Motion for Further Extension of Time to File Answer, are rendered moot. SO ORDERED. Presiding Justice 1 Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Nippon Express (Phils.) Corp., G.R. No. 212920, September 16, 2015.

RESOLUTION CTA CASE No. 10451 ~--~~ cXTHERINET(MANAHAN Associate Justice MARIAN IVY F. REYES-FAJARDO Associate Justice