Skip to decision

Court of Tax Appeals

0

VAN ~ELLE <Phi1s. >, INC vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

CTA Case No. 4783 February 8, 1995


Republic of the Philippines

COURT OF TAX APPEALS

Quezon City

VAN

~ELLE <Phi1s. >,

INC.,

Petitioner,

-

versus -

C.T.A. CASE NO. 4783

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL

REVENUE,

Respondent.

Promu1gated:

FEB 0 8 1995

X ----------------------------------------

D

E

C

I

S

I

0

N

This

case

involves

a

claim

for

refund

of

overpaid

income

tax

for

the

calendar

year

ending

December 31, 1989 in the amount of Pl,017,465.00.

Petitioner

is

a

domestic

corporation,

engaged

in

the

business

as

a

confectioner.

On

April

7,

1990, petitioner filed its annual income tax return

for

the

year ended December 31, 1989 which shows a

taxable

income

of

P3,167,666.00

and

an

income

tax

due

of

P1, 108,683.00.

In

its

'quarterly

income

tax

return

for

the

first quarter, petitioner

paid its income tax liability

in

the

amount of P2,126,148.00 which

is

computed

as

follows:


D E C I S I 0 N -

C.T.A. Case No. 4783

Quarter

1st

2nd

817570203

817395984

-

2 -

05-31-89

08-31-89

3rd

817493960

11-29-89

TOTAL INCOHE TAX PAID FOR 1989

A:HOUHT

655,711.00

678,423.00

792,014.00

p 2,.126,.148.00

=============

Petitioner averred that it overpaid its income tax

liability

for

the

year

1989

in

the

amount

of

P1,017,465.00, instead of its actual liability which

is

P1,108,683.00.

On

April

7, 1991,

petitioner filed its annual

income

tax

return

for

its

calendar

year

ended

December 31, 1990 showing a net loss of P5,352,455.00.

Petitioner alleged that

since he was not able

to

utilize its excess tax payments made in 1989 during

the

taxable year 1990 and 1991, it is entitled to the refund

pursuant

to Section 69, in relation to Section

230

of

the National Internal Revenue Code.

On

March 22, 1991, petitioner filed its written

claim for refund of overpaid income tax for 1989 in

the

amount of P1,017,465.00.

To

this date, respondent

has not yet acted

upon

petitioner's claim for refund.

Hence, this petition for

review

inorder

to toll the running of

the

two

year

prescriptive period prescribed in Section 230 of the Tax

Code.

238


D E C I S I 0 N -

C.T.A. Case No. 4783

-

3

-

Upon these facts, respondent raised as special and

affirmative

defenses

lack

of cause

of

action

under

Section 204 of the Tax Code, wherein the Commissioner of

Internal Revenue may refund or credit taxes

erroneously

or

illegally received.

Furthermore, respondent

assert

that

petitioner failed

to

establish that

the

tax

liability in the amount of P1,017,465.00 was erroneously

and

illegally collected.

Tax

refund

are

construed

strictly against the taxpayer as they are in the

nature

of tax exemption.

The sole issue raised in this petition is

whether

or not petitioner is entitled to the refund of

overpaid

income tax for the year 1989.

Petitioner

presented the following

documents

in

support of its claim:

( 1 )

<2>

(3)

Exhs.

"A" and "E" -

1989

and

1990

Annual Income Tax Returns.

Exhs.

"B", "B-1", "C",

"C-1",

"D"

and

"D-1"

Payments

orders

and

Confirmation Receipts for the first

three quarters of 1989.

Exh.

"I" -

Claim for

refund

March

21, 1991, filed with the

on March 22, 1991.

dated

BIR

Clearly, petitioner proved its proper

entitlement

to its claim for refund.

239


D E C I S I 0 N -

C.T.A. Case No. 4783

-

4 -

Records

reveal

that, in

a

resolution

dated October 27, 1992, respondent was declared in de£ault £or £ailure to file his answer within 30 days, £rom April 30, 1992 to May 30, 1992.

It was only on September 22, 1992, or a period of more than three months, when respondent filed hj~ answer. Again, in an Order dated August 9, 1993, respondent £ailed to £ile her comment on petitioner's £ormal o££er of evidence within the time given by the Court.

On the hearing held on October 20, 1993, respondent £ailed to appear prompting petitioner to ask the Court to declare respondent's absence as a waiver on her part to present evidence. It can be seen that there was no clear attempt on the part o£ respondent to contest and challenge th& veracity o£ petitioner's evidence and neither did the £ormer submit her own evidence. In summary, respondent slept on her rights in de£ending this case to the prejudice o£ the interest o£ the government o£ which she is primarily bound to protect, while petitioner showed to the full satis£action of the Court its clear entitlement to the relie£ sought for. Petitioners 1989 Corporate Income Tax £iled on April 7, 1990 Office No.

31, 1 2 3 D E C I S I 0 N -

- 5 - clearly shows its refundable amount and marked as Exhibit "A" with the following computations: Gross inco1e:

Fro• operations ISch.ll Loss fro• sales or exchange of property other than capital assets 1Sch.2l Other sources Total gross inco1e Less: deductions Net inco1e A1ount of tax due Deduct: quarterly tax pay~ents Qtr.

O.R. lo.

Date Aaount 1st 817570203 05-31-89 1 , 655, 711.002 2nd 817395984 08-31-89 678,423.003 3rd 817493960 11-29-89 792,014.00 Total a10unt of tax refundable , 45,058,366.00 21,500.00) 2,162,585.00 , 47,199,451.00 4410311785.00 p 3,167,66&.00 ================ , 1,108,683.00 2.126,148.00 , 1,017,465.00 =============:::

Respondent may be considered as not questioning seriously petitioner's entitlement to its claim for refund.

Moreso, when the evidence presented were not disputed by respondent, sufficiently established petitioner's right to the refund <Sanitary Wares Nfg.

vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, CTA Case No. 4150, August 21, 1992, Sun Life Insura11ce Office Ltd. vs. The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue, CTA Case No.

3205, June 23, 1989.

Exh. '8'.

Ex h. •c•.

241 '' 'I':'!• D E C I S I 0 N -

-· 6 -

WHEREFORE, in view o£ the £oregoing circumstances, respondent is hereby ordered to REFUND or issue tax credit in £avor o£ the petitioner the amount o£ P1,017,465.00 representing its overpaid income tax for the year 1989.

SO ORDERED.

GRUBA Associate Judge

WE CONCUR:

~~\9..~ ERN TO D. ACOSTA RA~,O~~~ Associate ~lu~W CERTIFICATION I hereby certi£y that this decision was reached a£ter due consultation among the members o£ the Court o£ Tax Appeals in accordance with Section 13, Article VIII, o£ the Constitution. 242 ~(2-~ ERHESTO D. ACOSTA Presiding ~Tudge Court o£ Tax Appeals

Contents