Court of Tax Appeals
0Republic of Tre Philippines Court of Tak Appeals Quf7on City Obra Pia De Fasig-Sadyvams Hart, et al. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, et al.
REPUBLIC OF TRE PHILIPPINES
COURT OF TAK APPEALS
QuF7ON CITY
OBRA PIA DE FASIG-SADYVAMS HART,
represented by The Romar (Catholic
Archbishop of Manila, Triuatrr,
Fetitioner,
—-versus — C.T.A. CASE NO. 3818
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Res dent : /
26 . oy eo ‘gaia ae 9 | 26/F/
Dd & C& af Ss FF 4G WW
Fetitioner OBRA FTA DE FAS IG—SADYANG HARI,
represented by the Raman Catholic Archbishop of
Manila, Trustee, appeals from ae decision of
respondent Commissioner af Internal Revenue denying
its protest against an assessment for deficiency
income tax for the caleniar year 1976 in the amount
of F19,841.66, inclusive of interest.
AS borne out by the record, petitioner
received from respondent on June 25, 1990, Income
Tax Deficiency Assessment No. 24-1-O44-082043-76 for
P19,841.66, which arose out of respondent’s including
in petitioner’s taxable income in the sum of
P26,681.56 representing the other half of its gain
on the sales of lots in Barrio Fulo, Pasig, Metro
Manila. (Par. 2, Petitioner for Review.)
408
D CIS lO I
CTA CASE NO . 381R
!Jn
Oct o b <:>r~
19110~
peti t ioner
through
counsel~ protested ti •P
w-: -;r~ss ment wh ic h protest was
1 '7'84
1'"!2("ei.ved
by
pr.ot.i. 1 i n ! of"'r ·
on
.June
20.
1984 .
(Par .
5~ Petitioner For Rev iew. )
the
present
pe t i t i o n
fo r
rev iew on J u l y
:50
~
1984.
This
court
has
noticed
that
t he
decis i on
C:\ppe.a led to t hi s
cC"Htt t
j E
actual ly signe d
by the
Reg ion.:\ l
Directo r-
and
n n t
by the Comm i ssioner of
Internal
Revenue.
P t e -numably
in
vi l?.l
o f
the
minimal
amount
i nvo
v~rl
t he
jurisdiction of
the
Reg ion a 1 Di rec: tor to
di~c ide t his t y pe of case is
wit h i n his compe t ence ~nd p roperly de l e gate d t o him
by
the
Commi ssicmer-
o ·f
l n 1:erna 1
Revenue.
Th is
i s sue
has
neve r
ra ised
nei ther
by
the
In
fact~ both
partiP.s
n " f .rn=>d
l: o
t.tw
.-I n ( i;;inn nf the
r<Pgion a l
In ternal Reven ue.
ConsPquent l y, for t he pu r pose of
uniformi t y t h is court adopts t he same numenc: lature.
The issue s
for resoluti o n
befor e
t he
Cou rt
are :
1.
Whether
this
Court
a cqui red
j urisdiction over this c ~qe
;
409
DECISION
CTA CASE NG. 3818 2s Whether the parcels of land in question are ordinary or capital assets.
On the issue of jurisdiction, respondent contends that petitioner received respondent’s denial of its protest on June 20, 1984 but it was only on July FO, 1984 that the petition for review was filed with this Court which is ten days beyond the thirty-day reqlementary period for appeal, hence this Court has not acquired jurisdiction over this case because the decision of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue an the protest of petitioner has become final and executory.
We agree. The petitioner for review was filed out of time.
Respondent's final decision dated May 23, 1984 denying the petitioner’s protest, was admittedly received by petitioner cn dine 20, 19764. (See Par. 5S, Fetition for Review, p. 2, ©.T.A. records.) The petitioner for revi) wes filed by the petitioner on July FO, 1984, forty days after its receipt of respondent’s final decision. Clearly, the herein petition for review was filed beyond the statutory period of thirty days prescribed in Section 11 of Republic Act No. 1125. Accordingly, this Court no longer has jurisdiction to entertain and determine 410 the correctness of the assessment and does not have to pass upon the second issue raised by the respondent.
WHEREFORE, the petition for review is hereby dismissed, with costs against petitioner.
80 ORDERED.
Quezon City, Metro Manila, September 26, 1991.
Crum, 2. Grek, ERNESTO D. ACOSTA
Associate Judge
WE CONCUR®:
po ALEX Z., REY
Fresidifig Ividqe
C. RNMAGQUIN “Associate Judge emperor CRRTVT FT CATT ow I hereby certify that this decision was reached after due consultation among the members of the Court of Tax Appeals in accordance with Section 12, Article VIII of the Constitution.
ALEX Z. REYES
Presiding Judge
Court of Tax Appeals
411