Court of Tax Appeals
0CTA Case No. 3766
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
COURT OF TAX APPEALS
QUEZON CITY
GENERAL ELECTRIC PHILIPPINES
METER AND INSTRUMENTS CO., INC.,
Petitioner,
VE SLUG on C.T.A. CASE NQ. 3766
,
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL |
REVENUE , <]26 q)
Respondent.
Me me Meee tae wee neat rc arr
This case anvolves a claim for the refund oaf
the amount af FOY.8546.00, representing erraneoausly
paic ar overpaid advance sates LAX aie by
petitioner cavering its various importations af
nylon pellet, Aluminum indats, reqiater, caver
assembly and other materials metesnary for the
‘
manufacture af electric meters fram April 14, 1982
ta June 1&,. IS82 cavered by the follawing Central
; yo
Rank official receipts as follows:
10% Advance Sales
Official Receipt No. Date Tax Paid
1263187 4-18-82 Fo 61,962.00
1220438 Sm 1P—B2 11,125.00
La57270 6 OPH? A, 787.00
LAST 269 Gr OE QE 9,660,009
1028
DECISION —-
CTA CASE NO. 37644
LE27443 6° 1A-Be J7 OVA OD
LS20788 & 16-82 7 AGB .O0
Total payments Fo fA, Fie. OO
It appears from the records that the Bureau of
Cus toms levied and collected orn petitioner’s
importations the 190% advance sales tax based on the
nrovisions of the Haktional Internal Fevenue Code,
However, in a meeting held on May 25, 19082, the
Board of Governors of the Eoard of Investments
qranted the request of General Electric Philippines
Meter and Instruments Ca... Tic. (GEFMICT } for
extensian of its 1OO% bax exempbhion henefits under
Section O(a) of R.A. S186 (Article 446(a) of the
Onnibus Investment Code) for another year to caver
the period April 1, i982 to March 2L, L983, subject
to the provisions of /.D. LAOS. Accordingly, tm a
letter dated April %€2, 19984, pebitioner, through
ites external auditor, Gycinp, Gorres, Velaya & Co.,
filed a claim for refund ovwi th the Bureau of
Internal Revenue which is the subject af the
instant review. Fetitioner alleged that on the
basis of the BOI extension of its tax exremmtion
privilege, its internal revenue tax liabilities for
the importations in question shauld be computed
only at 32% pursuant ta FLD. 1252 ag amended hy F.D.
ina
DECISION
CTA CASE NO. 3766 - 3 - 1395~ and the overpayment is arrived at as follows: F'1.15~712 p ~':17~856 To da t.e ~ respondent has ne.i ther- gr-an ted nor acted upon peti ti.oner ' s c 1 aim fot- t-efund.
Hence~ t his instant petition for review. Counse l s ·for the ~~ovet- nm ent in their·· answer df.~nied ·for lack of knowledge ot- in ·formation the allegations made by the petitioner in its petition for rev .i.ew.
As special c:ilnd a'ff.i.r··mat iVf:?
d Eden5'es' they a llt~ged that it is up to the pr?t.itionel'- to s how compliance with the provisions of Sections 292 and 295 of the Na tiona 1 In ter·na 1 Revenue Code of .1977;
that the amount of F'57~856 was collected pursuant to law and regulations~ and that a c la i m for refund should be strictly construed against the clai mant .
At the end of the hearing~ counsels for I respondent did not file a memorandum to dispute the l()S DECISION CTA CASE NO . 3766 - 4 - arqumeHts of the petition er in its memorandum dated .July 20~ 19c:10 but men-:: l y mani ·fested that they .:~n:~ ~; ubmittinq t:.hf:? case for- d ec: isic:m on the b c:~sir.;, o·f the pleading s and CTA records. The so le issue in this case is whether or not petitioner- Ge ner·al Electric Phi l ippines t1eter· and Instruments Co.~ Inc.
has erroneously paid or CJV~?r·pi::\id the advance sa 1 f:?S ta:-:
due on the a forem e ntioned import a tion s. We are in fu ll aqreement with petitioner that '"'nd is th~? Y .. (?· f c:>re~ (;:~nt .i. tlf?c:l to t .h e t•-e i 'und o i ' the amount of P5 7 ~85 6 .00 .
The plt;?adinq s the va t'- ious d oc urnt::.'n t ~5 ·for·minq par-t of t h r,~ r-ecnr·c:l s h o i-'J tltat pf:?t i t.i. onf:? r· h as f :i.l ed va lid c:la.i.rn with Commi ss ionf?r o·f In tE:>t'TtC:I l Rr,?venue i::\nd a ti mel y peti tion ·f or- revi ew within two year·~=.; ·from payment of t h e intern a l revenu e tax in ques tion.
~; ta ted, the Commi ssionet" of In t.t~ r· na l F~r:?ve n tH?
has neither gran ted nor acted f avor·ab 1 y on the c 1 a im ·for refund.
To this end ~ t h e p e tition er has SLI f ·f i c i e n t 1 y complied w.ith the pr-nv .i. s ion s of Sections 292 and 295 o f the Nat i ona l Internal Revenue Code of 197 7~ as amended.
DECISION CTA CASE NO . 3766 - 5 - L.ike\1-lise~ pet .i.t..ion~~~ r- \!'las a ble to pr·ove that during the period it made the s ubject importat i ons ·from Apr·il 14, 1982 to .:.tune .1.6~ 1982~ .it paid the total a mount o ·f p 1.1. ~.i ~ 71.2. 00 representing 1.0/.
a dvance sales tax pursuant to the Nationa l Inter nal R~:?venLH:'?
Code.
Con seq u en tl y~ when the Boar d of Investments in its meeting of May 25 ~ .1.982 extended t he
1. 00/. ta:·: e:·:emption bEmef .i. t s of the pet:.i tion er under Sections 8(a) of R.A. 5186 (Article 46(a) of the Omnibus Investmen t Code) for· another ye,~r to cover th1:~ pf:?r.i.od Apr·· .il .1.~ .1 982 to Marc h :::;. 1~ 1 9 8 3~ s ubj€?.ct.
to t h e provi. s i cm s o ·f P.O.
No .
.1 395 ~ the payment by petitioner of the .10% a d vance sales t ax became erroneous.
The so l e limitation to the r.-~x tenr::;i.on bei ng the .i.mpos .i. t.ion o ·f thE?
5/. customs du ty and 5/. intern a l revenue tax under P.O. 139~.
Accordingly~ thi s Court f inds the a foreme ntion e d c o mpu tation by petitioner of its cla im for refund based on the 5% t ax due as mer i tor· ious .
WHEREFORE, it i s her eby ordered that respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue grant to petitioner General Electric Philippines Meter and Instruments Co., Inc. the refund of the sum of P57,856.00.
1(17 DECISION CTA CASE NO. 3766 - 6 - No pronouncement as to c o s t s .
SO ORDERED.
Quezon City ~ Metro Manil a~ May 28 ~ 199 1 .
WE CONCUR:
Judqe Lx.. Q. OJ'"" ERNESTO D. ACOSTA Associ.;~.te Judge
CERTI FIC ATION
I herr-.? by certif y thl.s decision reached af t er due con s ultation among the me mbers of t he Cour·· t of Plppea ls in accordance \1-d th Section 13~ Article VIII of t he Constitution. lClR Presiding Judge Court o f Tax Appea l s