Court of Tax Appeals
0CTA Case No. 1872
Mer oP vie PHDLEPPin ee
COURT OF TAX APPEALS
QUEZON CITY
2
A on
ras eS -
.-
Petitioner,
-Vereas- G.T.he CASE No. 1872
THE COMMISSIONER OF , d
IHTSWAL REVANUE, (4
Rewn new wwe ew ww of {
DECcise trey
Petitioner has appenled from responient's assess-
ment in the amount of ©29,337. 57, represeating def Leien-
oy compensating tax due on its importation ef an air-
comiitioning unit. |
Petitioner is a eorporation GQuly organized ani
existing in aecordeece with the lews of the Philippines,
with Business eddress at Malaboa, Aisal. In the year
1965, 1¢ imported a complete set of air-conditioning
anit ao? poid 7% componsoting tax in the sum of 7,713.00
in seceriaence with Seetion 190, in relation to Section
185 of the Nationsl Interagl Revensne Code. On the theory
thet the imported article is subject to ea compensating ta
of 308 unter Section 195-4 im relation to Section 190 of
the Tax Code, respontent, on June 13, 1967, assessed
against petitioner a defieteney Compensating tax in thy ~
sam of $25,337.57. The assessment was protested by peti-
tioner in a letter dated June 29, 1967. Gn July 1%, 1967
petitioner filed the inatent petition for review.
DECISION -
CTA CASE No. 1872 ft The issues raised are:
(2) whether er not this Court has me orpe to eatertain the epperdy Leable for 30. Bonpensstia tex hy ~ hig ( While petitioner protested or contested the assessment of respondent dated June 13, 1967, it does net appear that . Geelsion hus been resdered by re- @pondent on said protest. The potition for review it- self does cot contain any allegation that a decision has been rendered by respondent on said protest. in order for this Court te acquire jurisdiction, it is indispensable that the assessuent mast have to be pro- tested by petitioner and a deetsion remiered thereon by Fecpontent. )
Section 7(1) of Aepublic Act do. 1225 provides (2) aa follows:
5k. 7. guppadiclign.~ The Court of kom risdd thon to revi aoe ur e ew as berets proviied - ‘
(2) Deeisions of the Cellecter of
Kovenue in
r) rae or other enar.es pened tise inpaoed in relation thereto, Other matters arising umier the Notional. Taternal Nevenue Code or other iaw or ef lew administered by the Bureau of ternsl tevenue. (Unierlining supplie’.)
Inte
DuCIsIion.
CTA CASE Bo. 1872 3 Tm fnterpreting the gbeote~quo ted provisie=-- law, the Sapreaes Cope hel 5 Chat the law ases the word be aes “assessments”, & tince in the inetent ease the taa- payer sppealed from the sessessment of the Commissioner of internal Levenue with- out previously contesting the same, the appeol] was prewature ané the Court of Tax Appeals had no jurisdiction to outertedn eei4 appeti. 7 os stated, tic :
@ cour’ spec} dietion. 4s sugh, 4t gun take caguizence omy of such matters as are clearly within its jurisdiction. (Conmicsioner Inter- et eee eee oe ce he ome 2, 1968; Sg ~tonisio be Lantie
v. Commissioner foal Revenue, . CLs Case Noe 2991, April iv, 1969, ynder- lining supplied.)
applying the above doctrine, it is clesr that | this Court hee ne jurisdiction to entertein the instant appeal becaire no deeision has as yet been rencere’ on the protest of petitioner against the assessment of June 13, 1967. Consequently, we find no alternative but to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdietion.
Decislor -
GTA CASE NO, 1872 a oo a a a aos a Having Geciiet tis Ttrst tssae adversely to po- titioner, the disposition of the secon! issue becomes unnecessary.
in View oF Th PoR*OOLAG, the instant appeal is hereby dismissed. | 80 oRDaRD.
Quezon City, Jannmary 20, 1970. (
—A_Ge Chinn €—___
ROWAN A. JMALI
Presiding Judge
wh CUNCUR:
liebe Vleee.
440 A, ALVAREZ
Asseetate Judge
Mh HO:
RAMOS L, AVANCHEA