CTA Case No. 5216

DECISION -

G.Y.A. CAS NO. S216 183 of the Natliaral fulerual Revetttue Code (NIG), as amended.

Perio to February idyue, ppolrtronel fas been weinyg the metering machine tos the atftature of Woethentary stamps oO pio paobicy ISsouannes, However, elite to rncoreasing volume Of tusubance polloy applications whose face values rude fiom hundred thousand of peiuas to wlitione, petttioner Pound this meter thy machine tedlous and Lime Consuming. thus, wit bebruaty Vis, louse , petitioner tTormally tequested the tHureaud oad Internal Hevenue (th 1it) - Waal Makati Branch tu a4liow the tise af POGH or ATAP (Authority 10 AGGepl Payment} SsyStem in tteu of the metering machine Ckah. Ad. Under the POCHR oF ALTAP System, petrtionei Wild pruvohase in AcdvanGe the <tlesired amount of dootunentlary olamps da whteh the Bie will bustie an AIAP bearing a serial number. the bank Vattedation ott the ALAP and the AIAP ilselt wild Serve as pPetitraner ’s ett iGial receipt.

through Hs. Leohiba Hhulbaon, thief, Colblleaution branoh, BIH ~ West Makati, the pequest was granted CbxKh.

A-~3). And th Gonsequence For the use of the AAP system, petitioner was fequired by the BIR to warntarihy a ledger wherein £t shalt record the type of choctineritia for whieh the dooumwentary stamps are arfixed aiid utibaizedt, the amount of tax paid, and the ATAP/POUH serial number being

DPECHTSION -

3... A. CASE NO. 5216 “ P| ~ consumed Petttroner t8 fteyutred to Submit @ true copy oft lLhis pedger to prave thal lhe Uooumentar y alamps purchased were fully CUNnSUmMBH betotre tt can buy the teat doGcumentary stamps.

ks) tactiitale the processing of this ledger, petitioner designed a Waoapu OOMm~put et progean ta autowattcatily compute the anoumt of Cocihetiiteary stamp tax based on the face value of tite insurance polioy enooded. However, petitioner alleged that ore two separate oeaagsiaons the face value of the tiffe ftusutahce polbtiates tssuecd to fr. Ntak a Faoarobaciat ane fis. Soledad B.

Legaspl with Pobiay Nos. ytd 706 atl V1ids/bo, respectively, were erroneously snocoded. lhe Policy No. VtSGI706 was erroneous ly enaoded as Pibo, 150,000.00, instead of PIBO, 000,00, whteh the campurted automatrioatiy yenerates a wrong documehkary sbampso bux of POSS, 675.00, Histead of FPE75, Gu, White Foltsoy Ro. YIGH/68 was encoded 48 F160, BO, 000.00, iftel@ad of Phew, Guu. 00, hus the computer generated another ereor oat the Sonputation oF dactumentary stamps tax amounting to PIG, dOO. gu, mstead ot P400.00 ony.

this earroneuwis enmeodiny of face Vabaleu ofr the aforesaid Fife Pasuranoe potioetes restited to overpayment of documentary atanps tsi x ate in the amount ot P775,000.00, computed as follows:

DEGISTON -

G.Y.A. GAS NO. 5216 Pobiay No. vidd soo Documentary stamp tax due on erronsvus face vaiue CP150,150,000 4+ 200 « G.690) P3S75,375.00 Less documentary stamp lax due on Gorreot face value (PISO,00U.00 +# 200 « U.50) een £9.00 Overpayment P3756, 000,00 Foltlay No. 81458766 Documentary atamp tax due on erroneous face valtte (P166,160,000 4+ 200 x O. 50) F400, 400. 00 Leas documentary stamp tax dua on correant tace value (P160,000.00 ¥* 200 x 0.80) 400. 00 Overpayment M008, GOO. 00 fatal overpayment P775,000. 00 the amount of hME/6b,5975.00 (Exh. Del) was charged by the petitioner umder ALAR Ne. dueezdt Cbahb. &) purchased on Aprdt fo, bua. Whike the amount or F400, 400.00 CExKh. F-1) was dedueted by the petitioner under ALAR Noa. 406286 (kab. GO), purchased on Aprad 22, byw, Petitioner bescomtng awale of the overpayment, tteled on April t6, lyesd wis Gtalm tor Lax Oredhit or un the alternative to adjust 118 documentary Slutips imventory th the amount or P7745, QU. OU (bah, Hod, tepreseanting the alleged overpard documentary stahps taa. lluweaver, the inaction of respondent an Its twetlet~-reqguest compelled the petitioner to Frise the tustant Petition for Keview on March 24, 1905 itn order to tolt the running GF the two- year presoriptive period aflowed under Seotion 240 of the

DECISION

- C.T.A.

CASE

NO.

5216 - b -· NIHC, as Hm ·ndod, i n 1 e I a t I (it) w I l h S e o t I o rt 2 0 4 ( 3 ) of the same code.

Upon

these fuots, responf1ent t'aiaed the tollowlr\{) s p eo I a I a n cJ a f I' 1 r tn a 'l i v e de t e n s e s 1 5.

Patltloner

fal led to show that the total am lllt'lt of P7"7fi,OO< .00 was aĶJtually expended and paid out of btH

POCA

Nos.

406241 and 40H2H6;

f.:\ • Pet 1 t I cHH " h a s not s how n t IH.l t Po I I o y Nos.

9134708 and 9138/66 were

Indeed

the

Insurance

pol lnies covered by the at leged erroneous payment of documentary stamp taxes In the amounts of P375,875.00 and P410,400.00, r·espeot i ve I y;

'1.

Petitlonet·' s olttlm ·fof' t.ax ot"c'HHt 'for· alleged trrotHHHts payment o·r tlo umentat·y stamp taxes

Is

still undet' lnvestlgatlon/examtnati0n by the etn, 8.

Claims

for rafunds are construed strictly agai n st the olalmant for· tt1e- sanH˩ partake the nature or exemption from taxation .

Therefore, it

Is

incumbent upon pet It 1 on or to show that

It

Is

˪nlit'I˫:H l tiHHI'.Ito, otht1rwlr,e, it shal I be fatal to its ot˥lm tor tax oredlti 9.

Tax˦s paid and ool ldated a r· t:

JH' u I:HIIIH!t d with taw and to have been madB regulations, hence, 10.

All told, a cause of aotlon .

I n a o o c. I' d a n 0 e n o t t" e 1' u n d a b I e ;

tl'le petition doefi not 8tate <pp.

2'1-·21, l.TA l'eo .)

In order to p1·ova that.

It

IS

enttttod to the amount sought for refund or tax oredlt, both or-al and dooumantary ovldeuoe.

petltlanˬr sutimltted On the other hand, respondent's presentation or evtdonod was d˧eru˨d waived,

DECISION -

C.T.A. GASE NO. 5216 upon motion of petittoner, for tattiure of respondent's Gounsel to appear and present her evidenoe on the date given by the Court (Resalution, Apri} 23, 1996, p. ab, CTA reaords).

All the evidence presented by the pelittuner were admitted by the Court ino obts Kesotuttion, dated Jathuary 26, 1996 (pp. 86-400, CTA reoords). Both parties submitted their respective memoranda.

(ts petitioner entitled to the amount of Péi7vh, 000.60 representing alleged overpaid dosoumentary stamps tax?

We answer in the atrirmative.

Petitioner was abie to prove that the oorrect fave Vatue of Insurance Policy Nos. 8ft384/06 and YISEHB tasuad to Mr. Ntok G. Enoarnacion and Ms, Soledad B. Legaspi, respectively, were th the amount of PhO, O0W.00 Chaha. &, E-1, | and t-1) and PIGO,000.00 Chats. G@, at, J and d=-4) and not P1150, 190,000.00 (exh. f-1) thor P160, 160,000.00 (Exh. F-1) as encoded in the computer. Sino, the eomputer program automatioally generates the documentary stamps tax due whenever the face Value of insuranes polloy was encoded, it wtil of course compute the sum of P375,375.00 and P3800, 400.00 for tine sub poct tnsuranoe poltoies based on the wrong amount anooded inatead of the eorrecot amount of P376.00 and P400,00 antly In addition, petitioner was able to establish that the olaim for age?

DECISION ~

C.T.A. GASE NO. 5216 refund or tax credit was filed within from the date of payment of the tax.

the two-year period it riled ita claim for refund with the BIR on Aprit 15, 1994 and with this Court on WMaroh 24, 1595, the reckoning date of the payment of the tax starts on April to documentary stamps tax paid an 9IBSATOG under AIAP No. 406249 (Ch xh 1993 aS regards Insurance Polioy under ATIAP No. 4062865 (ik. GG).

We catneot accged® to Péspondent os , 1993 with regard lhouranoe Policy No, $); and oon Aprad 22, 9148 7b ohar ged patsoothat ion that the docuuwentary Stamps tas of tisdurancs Poltoy Nos.

9I38d706 and VISE Sob’ were HOt paid aut and 406286, respectively, due tu polictes were issued months beture ATAPSs. the issue tere 18 not ttre payment of documentary Stamps tax but tax that arose ais Lo timan error and uf AIAP Nos, d06244 the faot that gad of Lhe puroghase of the Lime biness of thie ihe overpayment of Lhe recovery Or ai exoesgsive payment of @ national thbleriral revonue tax pursuant to Seatton 230 of the NIKC. For easy reference seotloh euu as tollows;

the NthG provides “Seo. 230. Recovecy of tax erioneousty or pitegalty cottleoted. ~ NO suit shall be twaintained in any ot proceeding court for the recovery of any hattonal thlarvwal revente tax hereafter alleged toa have beer erroneously or tliegally asseegsed at GOoOtleated, or wi any

DECISION -

G.T.A. CASE NO. 5216

~ B~

penalty olalmed to have been without authority, in any manner wrongfully oollected, unt) a Ooftaim for refund or credit has been duly filed with the Commissioner; but such suit or procesdtng may be maintained, whether or not Buch tax, penaity, of sum fas been patd under protest or duress.

in any oase, no such sult or proceeding snail be begun atter the expiration oof two years from the datée of pa a penalty reyardiess of ahy Stpervening cause that Wa y arise alter payor l x Prouvlifedd, however, that the Commi Satiaoner may, even without a written ee bain theroetor, tert av orecdit any tax, where oan fase of the return HOON whioh payment Wat hade, BuO payneadt appears olearly to have been erroneously paid.” (Underscoring suppttied) ymeat oF the tar or Furthermore, we Pit Wo fogts it respotdent’s reasoning that the computer-generaled tedgers should net be given probative Value. fhe Gases oited by the respondent’ s counsel teter two the usual ledger of books of accounts and not to the one required by the BIR to be maintained. (t Should be noted that the ledget was foremost required by the KIRK to keep track on the dooumentary stamps purohased in advanoe and how they are utilized by the petittoner. this Gourt ts of tie impression that respondent is Gheschinyg on the tecdyer since a true copy thereof (t ts to be stibmitted to the BIR before petitioner can buy tor the text set of ATAP, tt (8 to be stressed that under the A&1AP system, ct is only the ledger that can account on whether the rye

DEG ES TON

oP A

Aoocumentary

eres abit cd (Poot. thditec get ste dee toa tose titveretad This biseg 4 iA

No Hes

st atnpors pare hase were tutbty Her ti exec vy iy gree GE bivtherd put vey ered thot tt ofiead were yprated :ts at Voss tity ‘ or tla. ite peered podae te eatin ze ed feb { ttyl {4 I beau peragy itt ' \ a4 proud bared ion Yori ict i ft ti tt thy Hibs debe bb ah bee dyred i i { i paedrse Gay ee ho at peony Geta te feb pater i fi booit ' ' { \ { | 1! festa t Vey tadorg t { \ tye { peoted ta dbpa ai \ in Piya ! raid ! (4 ia ‘eh Oe eon it a) vbige ty a 1 d 43 { t 4 ity ity f ' i ed ee i the] aj ie t ! ' j i tite te boone wh Vor tebebea Dab by rr Ra. Qu obey a > tvs if

DECISION -

G.T.A. GASE NO. 5216

CERT FT CAT LON

1 hereby certify that this decision was reached after due wconstiitation with the members of the Court of Tax Appeals th acoordanoes with Gaclion 13, Arttote Vvitt of the Constitutton.

O = 2. Qh LHL STO DD. ALOLIA

Presidiag Iuage

Gab dt of baa Appeaisa ay Fo Ta