CTA Case No. 5053 (Decision)
- REPOllLIC OF TITE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY ACP INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, C.T.A. CASE NO. 5053 Petitioner, - versus - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Responden-t:. ,.., - - - DECISION Th i ::; of ' ' 'l the amount of Pli6S,ti23.5J for the ye:J1.� cnr!cd f);;:::.�1h'l.' "'.J, 199] Petitioner is a dom0stic corpnr~1tion r1nl}' �lrg~Hli 7 r'd existing in accordance with the and (,. r t-l1...., L \.1.) '�� Philippines. It is engaged in the buslacss which p 1� o Y i des f o r investment and man:Jgcillcnt. ~;cJ�,;,:,�::; L'ith pl_�incipal ::1ddrc::;s at SGV I Builcli11g, G7CO .\)�:!:.1 ,\\:'n:t�', r.bknti, Het;�. Hnnila. On April 24, 1992, petitioner filed i n c o me t ax 1 e t u r n f o r t h c c a 1 e n d a r y� c> '1 r� 1 f) 0 1 an operating loss in the sum of P32,892,41~.on, a nil . :~�. ' 156
- nr:cr;, roN -- c.T.A. CASE HO. 5053. - 2 �- income ta:-: Ji8hility \d th _; f rcprescntlng crcdit8hlr (E"" "B") PoL" tli�� yc:1r l 0 0 2 , p c t: i t i o u c c c .t ;.� r t : :.1 '� �.: ;�� r ! h r~ llO income t :1 =�: du� ;:hi h rr~ t i L i.<JllC r, b c 1 i e \' i n g t h .1 t it: i. (.) c.: 1} t i t l ._; t_l to rcfuntl of the 1991 excess tJ.x credit.., fiJcJ 1c t! \.1 cL.1im for n,;fuuJ. with the Durcau f InL L�-�1�.. d',� :_ l ~; Dcci..Owbcr 20, l'J93 puL.,;uu.nL Lo Sec. C7 Ln .! ...� 1 .; L ~JO t..hc N.::.tLiulldl Intern.::; l r.�:-.�ccc:. Jmcnded, N (: m(;rand u tn C i 1� c� u 1 ~I r ~~ ,_,:. .; .I l J 2 ... 7 6 ( E ~dl. II D" ) . neither ;;,t�.lnll:d n- the clnl1a r J' i�c�fund, pcLitiuncr 1[-i lr f~ I;; but to f i 1 c t l1 c i 11 CJ t: <.1 n t p c t i t i on 1Q9J ,<_')(-)' ) 111 01�dcr to toll the runnin&;, !._ --~-�, 1 l : {" � : prescriptive period alluwed by law. P. c~ ::; pun d c n t , in h e r ilnSh'er, the ~:;pccLd and ~tffirmali'vt.~ cleftnses, to �..-it: '."J' � Iu un ~1ctioa for rcfuud ,_:,[ L,;_~c:-;;, :lie. rn:oof i~> upon the '..... 'i t.hL1L the t c1 x. e s paid ot� 1 c �i� : :. L 1..:.: ~ r 1� u n e. u 11 s 1y or illegally collectod. Failure to 157
DECISION - C.T.A. CASE NO. 5053. - 3 -- sustain said burden i::; fatal to the ,Jctit.;J; f(;r refund; 6. It is incumbent upon petitioner to show that it has complied with the provisions of Section 230 of the Tax Code regarding the prescriptive period within which to file claims for refund; 7. Petitioner has not showu th~t the sought to be refunded in accordance ~o�i~h Nati.utwl Internal Revenue Code; 8. r c t i t i one r , lv h o has t� h c b 11 1�'1 <' 11 ' ' f proving that it is entitled to tax rcf11nd, !1;1::::; f a i 1 c d t o c s t ab 1 i s h t h a t the t ax ::; u b j c c L o f i L s claim for refund was erroneously or illc~ally collected; !J. The claim for tax t�cfund, b~in= in the nature of an exemption frolli LJ.xJLion, llllL.it: bc c o a :.:i L r u c d :.:; l r i c L 1 y ~1 g u L n :~ t: 1' ' t i t i (: :1 1� ( In s I! 1 ;J r L u m l>C' r r: o . F ,c-; � Co u r t c> f "" .., �, 1 '~ � , ' ; ;l ,. , JOq SCRJ 7ZO [lfJBl]) The ~-J ( ! '��, i. !3 ::::; u c: i: ~dt<:' t hr: 1' c 1' r1 � l ~c� c t� i t .i on e ~- l ~: ,.' n 1. i t 1 , � d L ' . L l I ~ the ClnlU1lllt uf p ,, 6 5 ' ,, :2 1 . 5 J ' . \ ( i l' ;: ; d credit.:1ble \v i t h h o 1 d in g t ::1 x :1t source for c:1! cnd:1 r 1991. As proof of its allegations, petitioner rt'~ScnLcd and offered relevant o.nd mcttcrio.l o.mong othcro, of: a 1901 and 1992 corporation annu:.t 1 LltC; Jl ~-�, i" 1' ,-. t U l'flS Lot:;,c' her \.\, i th the:. ::lt to.chmcnt. nf ::t !Jt.l i t (��, l I l t' ( 158
DECISION - C.T.A. CASE NO. 5053. and f inane Ld statements; (Exhs. "n .. to "~- 15" ;] il<l "D- 2 !1") b. Certificate of Creditable Incumc T~L Pithhclcl at Source issued by Royal Underganucul Cutl_JOf' .Jtic.n of Lhl: Philippine:~;; (Exh. "/\") .tnd t h c 1e t t e r c Ld m for r c f u a: 1 d :1 t '" d Dc ,, ,_, mh c r ua the t�.Jcnty-�t'tb,ht pages atto.chmcnts. (E�:lt'1. ffn n .. "D�~~8") i� Rc :_; p C' i 1cl c r1 t , o n t !1 c other ltand, f::; i J c:J ' :111 :: i 1. dnct!mcnt:ary C'/ idcncc cL1c� to the ab:.<n�.::c .r r �~' L :inYt"Stigation on petitio1ccr's she submitted the case based on th~ documents Jdduccd by petitioner. Doth p:1rtics, submitted their rc:;;pccti�. Respondent contended that petitioner :~::n L ... r 1.-:li m for t:hc refund () f p t, 6 5 , ,, 2 ,, . ()f) ' �I !' \ :Jllcgccl n\'Cl"l'Ctid crcclit . lllle h'ithholclin;;; L.t�: f, 1001. The said amount in �Jj Pl,378,00J.OO ~hich petitioner sought to be refunded tn the rc:1r 10~2 as shown in Exhibit "D-2~" of pet Lt: i.:~ nc-L~. Thu~;, rc::'l'uudcnt reasoned that "in the . I 1 d~ r c\�idcncc tc, c;ho>-J th3t petitioner aL,tndunuJ it:. ' :; l refund of the said sum of Pl,37C,08J.G8, L lie l ns L,_jr .. : ,':- �,�.
DECISION - c.T.A. c~~r ~n. 5051. - 5- claim fo~ ~cfund must be disrnis::~;cd, nt11r�r\.~t.-~r', pc!_ i. t i i.)1lC"I' \.Ji 1 1 b c g ran t c d the refund twice for thr same :1mount, to the damngc ~nd prejudice of the Government". h'8ll t give credence on the a-r6un1cnt of t ~-l ;~- 1- c .~; p u n c1r� ; ' t: , lbc� .san1c i ::-~ defeated pending ~JccLcts of this f t) u 11 d uut I p �.-~ t it i.cuc r filed :1 ~:;cr o r3 te c 1a i r.: r c~ r c u~ d i t :1 b 1c �-:ithho1ding ta:; ia :u:n P0l.;,C50.CO for yc:H 1002 aloac. T1j i (~ I. 1 '! i J:: f :> l :: c r .; ;1 r1 C. T . /~... Case Nc. r .. r� :�_. 1�:. ) __. 1 I1 !' \ ;._ ~. government 1d 11 not: he prcj ucl iced ' f :: l:-! c ll c .. ' l ' ,.,. -j .ldl.l ~' ''ll j_;l_ � petitioner 1: i 1 l be found en tit led to i t ~-~ l()'l 1 ~: :�: �" -' �rcditablc �.;lthholding taxes. P.cc:.puqJc�n t furthc:r argued t h :t t , ,- c 1 . i :n '� ,, p /j 65 ' . .. r ;) f: : .. t ;) :.;: f J ,.,, cf .... 00 ho ~) nc 1 \1 ~) j ,- � '� , .1n .1 .l. '-� �c j llll I' 1 :1v ' ;Jnd (~l ll :.. t JlQ cc;.:; ~~ :'�1 r l 1 y bn den icd f'l- I j t: ..,, ,, 1"\ :1 .I rl "" '' .~ ~: t 11 o 1 ] y i n c: u r 1us ::> r: ~; pui.ntcd nut th~1t petitioner (leductc:l .iU ,-:-1'':i:;c :.:Li:.�h not related to its business. ( Re sponclc n t: interest and fin8ncing charges in e1 mn u n t� p 3 ,, ' 1 ,, 2 ' J 7 0 .'0 0 0 (Exh. �"B-2") d (' d t1 ,~ ! r:' ,, from itr:; gross � . o.LF She :1 n ~~ 1 y .-: :�d ~ncom~ that since the bulk of its income ... , . . ��.1 �.�.:.�.,� ':�., .��, :_ 160 _/ 0 I
DECISION C.T.A. CASE no. 5053. - 6- nr ._, 1:. J gem en t ;.;crviccs r'n(!CJ ~dl'll!C'llt Corporat iotl of the rhilippincs ln til c .1mo un t ;_,f P9,308,~70.20, the interest and financing ch~;rgc:o; ::.;hou"!,J be disa.llo\Jcd ::li nee i t is not related Lu ll:..; bus lllC: :_, .:�. She Lh.:.:il .:..:itL:tl Section 29(a) of Lh~ provides: sc,:tion 29. Deductions frura gt"<)SS Lnc(.lliC. -� Iu --:uwputiug tJ"'"J.ble income ::>uLjr_:cL Lu L,L�. u n d c r S e c . 2 1 ( <1 ) ; 2 l1 ( a ) , ( b ) ,111 . ! (' ) ; ' 1u 1 2 S (.~1 ) ( l ) , the 1: c ::d1.tl 1 be a 1 1 (l\v c d :1 s d c :ln :: t i ,; n ::; t! t 'c i t ,, m;-:-, :::; p c c i f i c d in p a.r a g r n r h: . ( :1 ) t- - ( i ) :\ [: t h. i :�_, ,"� ~-, =.~~ L l. (> rl � ( :l ) Expen~:rc':3. c1 ) nus 1 n c ,. :; :.~ :; r, �:: .' t~ ~; � (.\) In general. - .\11 ordin�1r:' ~~nd r��.,�.-.;�� -,~-:- expenses paid or incurred during the t :l :: ;'! h! ("' ~�e:.1r in ca:tT:,�ing on any trncL� �;:� inclu:Jir::; a rc.Jc:�.,)n;tblc alloh':1ac.~ [.� . . . ' �. .~ nc oth~._r contf'!C"tl!J~1tiotl fnJ' il:-~r.r_�.{__,n.-:1 actu.J11> '�'' L rcndc~�ed; t.raYcl]int, ---1 r:. 1. 1 " :�lh':l~� fi�c,r:t home i.tl tltc pur::.tt: t ' ' profc:�;:�;inn (il." b11::i1l<'f'::::, r::;;:�:.tl:-: ,�,1� ''l� r:,t_:,:;n~:n t :; r:�:~"lu 1 rctl ~- :1 1)c m:�\clc' t:-�, : 1 :~t:~ 1 t : .;!: �, t h e ,- .-, n t l n u c cl u :': (_' o r p u ~; :~ c ::: :: : ,_. u , f �; :. ~ h: pur p o fC:"' of t h C' t r ::Fl (' , prof c sf~ i n n n r l� 11 '~ i tF' :-; s , c f pr:')1'r~r1-y t o \l!li~~ll tlle t:l~�:r1:1~1'f~r h:1,.... nnt- t- �~l� ~~i"t or is not: takirq; title o~� in ;:hicli he: 1;;<:; tl'! equity. Tt from th12 ,'J bo v c �- ,- i 1 C' d .Iii deductible from ;t r '�~ r::1 u i r c n1 c n t s ) t o t\� i t ~ .161
DECISION - C.T.A. CASE NO. 5053. - 7- ( 1 ) th 0 expense must be [1oth orrlinn~:r 11 c c c s s a r ~T ; ( 2) the c::pcnsc must be paid ur ( j) th:~ c;.;:pen:::;c mu::;t be incurrcJ t:�.Jde ()j JJ\1 .. LllC'US. E::pctlc::: i r,; conr:; i dcrc~(l i n , � 11 :.� i 11 tL:' tl�:Jdc or t ..:::f.lj'Cl' It r :�.: c <..dl:. 1 c1 c 1.� c d 11 c :.: c s ::; ,, r ~� if l t: is appro p r :. J t c :w r! 1t e: ~ i f :Ll the t:J'ZP:JY('r's or business or c l) (' 1l p Cl t mand:Jtory t:ho.t a l l c~:pen ses be both orr:linn;�~- necessary c::pcnclituro::;. An cspcn:.:;c Go u i' :; t~ , p .; ,. . '� 0 ; , Js citcJ iu Lhc National Internal by AraiLt:;, p. 193, Vol. 1; H. Newtua Hh t l. I. 1 (' :.; :; ,; y, Tnc., TC 700 (19';7) !. r t:hu r- nall<Jnliac, ..T~ "'"'" ,. ) (1")5G) L1;; nf '�.".. Thu;:, respondent opinerl tho.t 1 n ,-,... fr0rn has T �� p ] � 27~. 03?_~00 Net i.nc,Jme 162 �~
DECISION - C.T.l. CASE NO. 505J. - B- to th (' Court's n t�l r t r1. , r :r ,., ~� c~ n rlo n t~ , ,... cnntcntion j:�_: out of issue. The d c d u l' t _t h j 1 i. t y of an expense :;;:hould be . u" a:~sc~r:3rncr1t c;1SC or .J.t the time . t u L L o r i ;_ c cl L � - ] :r h' i' 1 e.,.. c� 1 . T 1J..i 'l ,��� Court i :.:. not ~'' ,. t ;1 c k ] c ;_: u ( h .','. ! 1-1 �~ ��'�. �c n -r 1..) 1 Th i :: judicial claim fu:: ;�~_�fu;l\! �, f .J n ~redtt1.h!c t _r1:: �1n�l ~: -�' l! o 1 J f i r n: th~lt it: r: f ~ 1 ' .... ,�~ '1 ~� r .-.,-idt:cncc to.::paye r -'! l 1 ~- l' l' <>ilil~� Laic�:: -.. It. h the f o 11 ,-,�.;in~ three 1J.: : i c '-'j1! � :_CT~ ~lt.:-;; ( 1 ) th.::tt: filed (_ 1 ;~ ! (Il d I'.. ': -~ pc�rir"l ~-~ :., r t . r ~ l -1 IIJJt!<�r ":.:-ction 2':':2 (nC\.J ~ 10) ,, r t� ~ 1 ' "1 1 ~ In t c r o .1 1 r. .-, \' c n L: (: r., "1c ; ( 2) that the Lnco mc up D n ~-: ~ t t :! 1 t h: � t: ~\:. c: ::~ \JC rc I; 1 L h h c 1 d \\ c 1� c included la the r't:11n :~[ ( ~J) the fact of ~d thlw Ll it�:::; e .; L 1b 1 i .:> li c d. b y .::t c o p y o [ s t o t c mc n t ( r T '!; r : m 1 7 t1 3 . 1 ) d u 1 y i s s u c d b y t h c p a r c r c1: it !!11 �]:.lit:.; .1gcut) to tho P<l':J't~c, sho\\ine, ~-hr: .Jm�~��t!::!. u,,. . ta.:;- ~>'i.thh��l.l .1nd tll:� amount of .,-\ 'r! 'ill' ( :J c c . 1 0 , Rc v � Rc g s � 6 �- 0 '3 ; C i t y t. r<J f; L C:Jrpoc;Lion v. The CommissitHl'.'C o( Tic~"..~t~t~t;:-:, CT!-,. C~1~;c �Nc). '�13ft, t!nv(�:J:Lt(}r ~1 1'"""'"' ~1.~-~�L.~:~_�;t Fin~'Jn.c�,~ c~)['fL,:rr~:~: .:�a rr 1- Invc::::~ors Finance Corporation/fNCfl ; ir;,l::� :;j Commicsioner of Internal Revenue, CTI\ Case No. 163
DECISION - C.T.A. CASE NO. 5053. -9- 't 0 t, G , r ,� h r u a r y 2 t, , 1 9 9 J ; a n d l' a s co nc a 1 t y ~' n d Dcv(~lc;pr!lf~nt: Corporation v. Commissionc1� of Intcrn;d Revenue, CTA Case No. 1,251,, /'.ugu:~t 10, 1993; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of Tax Appeals and Pasco Realty and Development Corporation, CA-G.R. SP No. 32927, February 28, 199/t) . . Ba::>ctl :..JU the u[ Lh'-' pcti.Li.uuc1� n1ct :tll the three r c q u i. r c mc n t. ~=- ~' c L c 1 :~ 1 :1 :... '�� L furth. F 11::; t, the cLtim for re [ unJ \:~1::; t: ilte 1 y f l J. '1 h'itllin 1.1:-:: 1.\Jo�-ycar per i,;c] .r '" f ;,' :J 111 t� n t c. r ::.1f ~lt(' "" 1 �tLj~Jl1 1 In t c r n ;J 1 P.. �: ,. c n u <' amended. T1 it: ( 1 ,I; j,: for refund �.-�ith the Durco.u of IulCl.'ll..J.l (' L. Dcc r.2mbc t' 20 ) 1CJIJ3 (Exit "D-2CJ " ) antl i ..,;, Llt c (_� L1.; \J J.l -.'l! J..L .......) - D c ,_. �.� 1:1 b c .:.:'ln 1 n n " ' ...1. The th�o-year , pe~ Lod l il Ll11...~ " li.3 L ~-i .. I _; _i ' '' t 'I l.'t on Av r 1 l 1 'i ) 1 'l 'J ::: ) ' } L �,. '- i ;:: cc,1uirc:l the pc t i. t i :) il c: 1 !' r: ! 1 '' I" i\ ' 1 I " I r ( Contnl i.:;:-; i CHl.Cr 0 T:1c. al., G.R. No. .., r:. ) Sc c: '\ld) pctitiun.c:c clcclarc:l :~~ Jt: i Il1 ~, : ; ' L .1 x 1: c t� ll c n , [ o r \.'hi ��h t 1� ' tax sought to be refunded ~as withheld. Tll i c: "P,-lG" \vherein the amount of P ') , l o n , '1 7 '1 . n n , rcprcscntin~ management fee, received as part of petitioner's gross income. Aud lastly, the . ' 164
DECISION C.T.A. CASE NO. 5051. - 10 - uf ;,�i.thholdin;; iS h'C 11 1 l 1 '~ ; t ~; ~ i j ' : 1 ,. '1 'J ~rcscntation of Certificate of Crcdit~blc Hithheld At Source (Exh. "A"). In th; absence of rcsvuaJcul mi::.;crauly f<.~iled to i 11 L. 1� u d u. c c ) Lh i:; Ccc;L finJs for thn petitioner. t 1,. ~:; um of p 1 (j 5 ) ,, 2 3 . 5 3 ; ;:itLhuJ.lin;; t~1x at :�.n11:�c:' fnr the cnl 11d:1r :,�:'.11. 1"'11. ~0 ORDERED. ERrJF.STO !) , A~ f' n ~ T ~~ , 1' 'l n 0 .� . 'C) HE CONCUR: CRUfl.', Judge ~a.w C. DE VE.~. ,(, .._ l cl L C J ll J;; ,; '165
n:--cr.-: Tf'Y'! - ".T.A. ~~~r nn. sos1. CEnT TF TCAT I C N ;..: �.: 1" t i [ ~- t h :1 t tllC T :1~ �. n. ], c r: ',.' 1, '.'TTT r .t� �::l�i::l:Jnc '-: i L li SccLiuJJ 1"' \!.I r.l .-.: i �.. j . :0 ~ 1 . � 1' �..1 \.J _j.bl 166
More in CTA Decisions
- TOTAL (PHILIPPINES) CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 1603)
- NIPPON EXPRESS PHILIPPINES CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 335)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK (Consolidated with EB 580)(CTA Case No. EB 577)
- CTA Case No. 313 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 313)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. MA. ERLINDA T. ONG, Doing Business Under the Name and Style Maranatha Sales Distributor, Duly Represented herein by her Attorney-in-fact, Ms. Ria Sablon,(CTA Case No. EB 2978)
- CTA Case No. 6571 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 6571)
- CTA Case No. 393 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 393)
- CTA Case No. 693 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 693)
Want an analysis of this document?
Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.