CIR vs Phil. Global Communications, GR 167146, Oct. 31, 2006
Short Description
WON the CIR can still collect the tax deficiency...
Description
CIR vs Phil. Global Communications, GR 167146, Oct. 31, 2006 Facts rs! rs!on on" "nt nt rci rciv v" " a Prl Prlim imin inar ar# # $ss $ssssm ssmnt nt %otic %otic "at "at" " 13 $!ri $!rill 1&&4 'or "(cinc# incom ta) in th amount o' P11*,271,672.00 On th th 'oll 'ollo+ o+in in "a# "a#, 22 $!ri $!rill 1&&4 1&&4,, rs! rs!on on" "nt nt rc rciv iv" " a Forma ormall $ssssmnt %otic +ith $ssssmnt %otic %o. 0006**-*0-7333, "at" 14 $!ril 1&&4, 'or "(cinc# incom ta) in th total amount o' P11*,271,672.00. Rs!o s!on"nt nt, throu ouh its counsl Ponc nril il Ca#tano R#s an" /analastas a+ Oics, (l" a 'ormal !rotst. Rs!on"nt rust" 'or th cancllation o' th ta) assssmnt, +hich th# all" +as invali" 'or lac o' 'actual an" lal basis. 45 On 16 Octo Octob brr 2002 2002,, mor mor than than ih ihtt #ar #ars s a't a'trr th th ass assssm ssmn ntt +as +as !rsumabl# !rsumabl# issu", th Ponc Ponc nrilCa#t nrilCa#tano ano R#s an" /analasta /analastas s a+ Oic Oics s rci rciv v" " 'rom 'rom th th CIR CIR a Final Final ci cisio sion n "at "at" " * Octo Octobr br 2002 2002 "n#in th rs!on"nts !rotst . Rs!on"nt (l" a Ptition 'or Rvi+ +ith th C$. $'tr "u notic an" harin, th C$ rn"r" a cision in 'avor o' rs!on"nt on & 8un 2004.65 h C$ rul" on th !rimar# issu o' !rscri!tion an" 'oun" it unn unnc css ssar ar# # to "ci "ci" " th th issu issus s on th th vali vali"it "it# # an" an" !ro! !ro!ri rit# t# o' th th asss assssm smn nt. t. It "ci" "ci"" " that that th th !rot !rotst st ltt lttr rs s (l" (l" b# th th rs!o rs!on" n"n ntt cannot constitut a rust 'or rinvstiation, hnc, th# cannot toll th runnin o' th !rscri!tiv !rio" to collct th assss" "(cinc# incom ta). h assssmnt, in this cas, +as !rsumabl# issu" on 14 $!ril 1&&4 sinc th rs!on" rs!on"nt nt "i" not "is!ut "is!ut th CIRs CIRs claim. claim. hr'o hr'or, r, th 9IR ha" until 13 $!ril 1&&7. :o+vr, as thr +as no ;arrant o' istraint an"6* on & 8anuar# 2003 2003,, +h +hic ich h +as +as sv svra rall #ar #ars s b#o b#on" n" th th thr thr-# #ar ar !rs !rscr cri! i!ti tiv v !rio". hus, th CIR is no+ !rscrib" 'rom collctin th assss" ta).
Issu? ;O% th CIR can still collct th all" ta) "(cinc# 'rom rs!on"nt.
%O.
h la+ !rscrib" a !rio" o' thr #ars 'rom th "at th rturn +as actuall# (l" or 'rom th last "at !rscrib" b# la+ 'or th (lin o' such rturn, +hichvr cam latr, latr, +ithin +hich th 9IR ma# assss a national intrnal rvnu ta).
h assssmnt, in this cas, +as !rsumabl# issu" on 14 $!ril 1&&4 sinc th rs!on"nt "i" not "is!ut th CIRs claim. hr'or, th 9IR ha" until 13 $!ril 1&&7. :o+vr, as thr +as no ;arrant o' istraint an"6* on & 8anuar# 2003, +hich +as svral #ars b#on" th thr-#ar !rscri!tiv !rio". hus, th CIR is no+ !rscrib" 'rom collctin th assss" ta).
In th !rsnt cas, th s!arat lttrs o' !rotst "at" 6 /a# 1&&4 an" 23 /a# 1&&4 1&&4 ar rus rusts ts 'or rcons rconsi" i"rat ration ion.. h CIRs CIRs alla allatio tion n that that thr thr +as +as a rust rust 'or rinvstia rinvstiation tion is inconciva inconcivabl bl sinc rs!on"nt rs!on"nt consistn consistntl# tl# an" catoricall# r'us" to submit n+ vi"nc an" coo!rat in an# rinvstiation !roc"ins.
h "istinction bt+n a rust 'or rconsi"ration an" a rust 'or rin rinv vst sti iat atio ion n is sin sini( i(ca cant nt.. It bar bars s r! r!ti titi tion on that that a ru rus stt 'or 'or rconsi"ration, unli a rust 'or rinvstiation, cannot sus!n" th statut o' limitations on th collction o' an assss" ta). I' both t#!s o' !rotst can ctivl# intrru!t th runnin o' th statut o' limitations, an rronous assssmnt ma# nvr !rscrib. I' th ta)!a#r 'ails to (l a !rotst, thn th rronous assssmnt +oul" bcom (n a l 2&5 an" una!!alabl. On th othr han", i' th ta)!a#r "os (l th !rotst on a !at !atnt ntl# l# rro rrono nous us ass assssm ssmn nt, t, th th stat statut ut o' limi limita tati tion ons s +o +oul ul" " automaticall# b sus!n"" an" th ta) thron ma# b collct" lon a'tr it +as +as ass assss ss" ".. /an /an+h +hil il th th int intr rst st on th th "(c "(ci inc nci is s an" an" th th surcha surchar rs s contin continu u to accumu accumulat lat. . $n" 'or an unrst unrstric rict" t" numbr numbr o' #ars, th ta)!a#rs rmain uncrtain an" ar bur"n" +ith th costs o' !rsrvin thir boos an" rcor"s. his is th !r"icamnt that th la+ on th statut o' limitations ss to !rvnt. %ot?
In a numb numbr r o' cas cass, s, this this Cour Courtt has has also also clari clari( (" " that that th th stat statut ut o' limitations on th collction o' ta)s shoul" bn(t both th Govrnmnt an" th ta)!a#rs. ta)!a#rs. In ths cass, th Court 'urthr illustrat" illustrat" th harm'ul harm'ul cts that th "la# in th assssmnt an" collction o' ta)s in@icts u!on ta)!a#rs. In Republic of the Philippines v. Ablaza,1&5 this this Court Court m!hat m!hatica icall# ll# )!lain" that th statut o' limitations o' actions 'or th collction o' ta)s is =usti =usti( (" " b# th th n" n" to !rot !rotc ctt la+la+-ab abi" i"in in citi citiA Ans ns 'rom 'rom !ossi !ossibl bl harassmnt? h la+ !rscribin a limitation o' actions 'or th collction o' th incom ta) is bn(cial both to th Govrnmnt an" to its citi citiA Ans nsBB to th th Govr Govrnm nmn ntt bca bcaus us ta) ta) oic oicrs rs +o +oul ul" " b obli" to act !rom!tl# in th main o' assssmnt, an" to citiAns bcaus a'tr th la!s o' th !rio" o' !rscri!tion citiAns +oul" hav a 'lin o' scurit# aainst unscru!ulous ta) ants +ho +ill al+a#s (n" an )cus to ins!ct th boos o' ta)!a#rs, not to "trmin th lattrs ral liabilit#, but to ta a"vanta o' vr# o!!ortunit# to molst, !ac'ul, la+abi"in abi"in citiA citiAns. ns. ;itho ;ithout ut such such lal lal "'ns "'ns ta)!a# ta)!a#rs rs +oul" +oul" 'urthrmor b un"r obliation to al+a#s ! thir boos an" ! ! thm thm o!n o!n 'or 'or ins! ins!c cti tion on sub= sub=c ctt to hara harass ssm mnt nt b# unsc unscru ru!u !ulo lous us ta) ta) an ants ts.. h h la+ la+ on !rs !rscr cri! i!ti tion on bin bin a rm"ial masur shoul" b intr!rt" in a +a# con"uciv to brinin about th bn(cint !ur!os o' aor"in !rotction to th ta)!a#r +ithin th contm!lation o' th Commission +hich rcommn"" th a!!roval o' th la+. la+. $n" aain in th rcnt cas Bank of the Philippine Islands v. v. Commissioner 205 this this Cour Court, t, in con( con(rm rmin in ths ths arl arlir ir rulin rulins, s, of Int Intern ernal al Revenu Revenue e, !ronounc" that?
houh th statut o' limitations on assssmnt an" collction o' national intrnal rvnu ta)s bn(ts both th Govrnmnt an" th ta)!a#r, it !rinci!all# intn"s to aor" !rotction to th ta)!a#r aainst unrasonabl invstiation. h in"(nit )tnsion )tnsion o' th !rio" 'or assssmnt assssmnt is unrasonabl unrasonabl bcaus it "!rivs th sai" ta)!a#r o' th assuranc that h +ill no lonr b sub=ct" to 'urthr invstiation 'or ta)s a'tr th )!iration o' a rasonabl !rio" o' tim. hus, in Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. B.F. Goodrich ,215 this Court airm" that th la+ on !rscri!tion shoul" b librall# constru" in or"r to !rotct ta)!a#rs an" that, as a corollar#, th )c!tions to th la+ on !rscri!tion shoul" b strictl# constru".
h h a) Co" Co" o' 1&77, 1&77, as amn amn" "", ", !rov !rovi" i"s s inst instan anc cs s +h +hn n th th runnin o' th statut o' limitations on th assssmnt an" collction o' national intrnal rvnu ta)s coul" b sus!n"", vn in th absnc o' a +aivr, +aivr, un"r ction 271 thro' +hich ra"s?
View more...
Comments