CTA Case No. 258 (Resolution)
.\ ... 1 \ ~ '~ ' ~ -( \. ftEf>UBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINE. r( URT OF i.'AX APP E ALS � � lLlAI , I tition r,. ,� versus � .. T. A. o. 258 THE Ol GT . If ~~ ~VE lUi;; � espon en , X� � � � � - � ~ ~ ------ ~ E O L UTIO f 44 .otion "to is iss" has be n fil <i by r � on pond nt the ground that the pe� ition or revie fil d b yond �th - d peri d pre c rib d in ion ll of epubl~c c o . 1 25 . he record slo hat x ondent a cess d nd d nded from p tition r the ...aunts of � 3 1 1�~o . a2 f r tl p riod fr o 1948 to 195 nd �9 , 552. 82 for t period fro 1951 to 9~ � both s ~-i,l sales t X n all g gr ss ale 0 1 gs . he first assess- , .ont oc )I 7"' . 82 . ac bo n r duced to �2, 62.J . CO , p - "tion vvin pai the sur of 1,105. 82. It do s no appear wh n the original sess� nt v. ctu lly m de or is ua � It has be n o�n1 ho v r , respo d nt VttO e several le - t of e1.and to p itio r, ut o �11�� ~;;....., se of � Jun 195 ' D r 12, l955 nd F bruary 1' , 1956 hav on pr sented for consid ra ion. .rior to th lett -r of d~man � r ora p c i *c al ly , on re ru ry lO~ 195 , p i ion r est d re n i- deration of th as ss. t w i c: h t he provinc i l r&� ..... u a e t f riental indoro1 pr viou ly tempt d 282
.� c.. � , to ollect from hi, personally. sponden , throu h the cting ~hie � he � ss ent D p r ent, de� n1 s td request i June 7, l 55 an .r~iter d t~ r in is d� nd for the pa . nt of th � said t x obli at~on ithin t 10) o ys r m roc ipt of said latt r Ann x � This letter was rec ived by p tition r on August lB, 1955. ub- noth r l t r to re pond n offering to settle is ca a ic b y, i qu t . l o �e ied by t e in hi l t r of Dec r 12, 1,5 n r - c ei d y p 1t � ner on J nuary 9 , 1956. On th sad~ te oun�el for tion r g in r st con i� r atio f t e ~ision which was lik i d i d � 19 6. � hi 1 st lett r o r spond nt w c v y petitio er on Febru ry 29 , 1956, n on pril 21 l 56, he filed th pr nt peti ion for revie � e sole is u h r is whe h r or not th p - it!on t r r view s fil ithin day after re- "pt y pcti ioner of r pond nt ' s d ci ion, pur- su a.nt to <:: tion ll , epu lie J: ,t .Jo. 112 � eti io �r cl ims th e thir y� ay r'od f i this c s sho 1 b ,c ount d rm b \.1 y 29 , l o, dt h h i la 1 ter o tl ' ol� f c .t:Ved enu o : brua y 13, l 6, �tr in his petition f r con id rat.i.on . po nt 1 o tAn t o h r han � o hat t � riod oul e counted ro Augu$ /1e. 1 ~5 . the d p titio er 1 I . r ' ived r sponde ~s lett r ated Jun 283
� X X X t 2. 19 intern p[;, It< 2 8 !J
R.irO.L.UTcl � � 258 � .. 4 .. c: ~ inv lvi a d. pu ss SShent itlin t m in~ of ticcti n 7 1 o e pu lie Ac t o. 1125, which, if not ppe led o this Court ithin day~ fter r c ipt thoreof, pursuant o � tion 11 of said ct, beco es final and executory. ,. le asee sment mad by the ollector of nternal ev nue is he x.� v. sub nt 1 nd di po it� p rt of hls d cision x nta illa do rd ot x hppeals, � . t � l o. L-7384, De � 19� 1 5. ) Our opinion t at a 1 tter of demand or an - t issu 0y th �ollector of t rnal as a d ffect of a juclg � nt or d - ci �on finds u port n th c s o ull � u. o., 247. n h t c s , ' upr ourt of ~h nit State mad the following o sarv ions. l x i n ac � io y t w sov ... n, and necessarily th sovereign has on r �.ble c j;;J against v ry one v.ri hi � x ' 1 cl ss for th amou t la f lly i " . T! u s a u pr sc ib s h rul f axa ion . ;JOr.l � achinery mu t prov � ed ~ r a plyi, the rule to h f ct in a h a.pay r ' c en , in ord to asc - t i the no nt due. chose inst.ru' n- taliL r fer th purpo e is an ad.inist ctive a ncy ~ hos a tion is cal ed an s vSJ, nt . Th a~se~srent may b a v luation of pro- perty su ject o t xation hicl lu tion is to be multiplied by th statutory rat to ertai th amount of ax. Or i r ay inc ude th c lcul-tion and fix le amount of tax payanle, and ~ sessments of federal est te and inco e taxes are of thi t pe . n the tax is ss ssed the t x y r ~ill o~~ th ~ verei~n th a~o nt vhen the date i ed .o' law for pa ... nt arrivos. U fault in eet �ng th obl ...g t on cAlls for some . roc o 1r h r y p 1 ent c n b enforce � .h stat t ight remit the g v �� nment to' act� on t l 1 wh r in th taxp y r coul off�r uch d f so -e h h d. , judgment ainst him might collect d by the levy of an execution . But t~xcs ar the life- loo of gov r nt. an t ir pro. t and e rt in vailability n imperious need. �r out of min , th ef or , th .sovereign h t' sort d to mor drast c ns o c 1� (' J
OltJTI � � T.A. C/J 'E NO.� 258 ., lection. i given the ore of a judgm n 1 an if . he "oun a -sessed is not p id �� n due, adm!� nistr tiv o ficials a s .iz �he debtor' s pro J't t �s tisfy the deb-t. � n th� intant cas � no vtdenQ has been sub� itt&d y both p :t-ti s s to ben t' original as- . �� ment m de or i u by r�sp-cnd t. It ap.. th t p t �tion ~ � .e '!'ly as Feb� ruuy 10, 195~, in a lett r ttddres-sed to respondent ss ssrr:ent. �bvious r. the assess nt by etitioner on or l)e,f t � , Gn$1d ring the ass ssm.nt as n ing received on February l , 195'5, nd since a r qu &t foT �r consid :l!'&tion w� file . n t � at�, the 80-d y pe:r1od within hieb 0 p ��1 i tely su p: ode � Th .re� qu:est for r ons1d -at ' n was enied in the lett r of tbe Acting Chi�f , f t e A$sessment Depa.rtm.nt dat June 71 19!>5� whieh was received y p titioner o e not .lett�r to t spondent off rin to settle tb case ieably,. ut "h!ch may be cons-idered as .t'equ Gt for r consider ti n or revl$1on of the asse$S� nt cause, 1n upport f his ela foT r vision ., . he offera .nt submit do~umentary ev d nces to sup- port id claim. " (Annex o. 1, otion to 1smi$e.) This 12, 1955, which was received by pet!tioll! r �� n �an.. uary 9 1 1956. On th _ s � dat� ( anu8Zy 9, 1956). petition-er again reque�t� r �<ms:lderat!on which
� ... . � 258 "' " ... 6 .. �.; s ega�n d .nie :n 1 t r d F ru ry 1 #- 1956 d 11 ... dl r ei d - p t i er n r a:ry 29 , 1956. Under the f ct t t ~ ov it w ar of th op ht -::!' d y p riod 1it 4. in � hie 0 P"" 1� pel t o t i ourt comm n to r n r 1 56 nd a su-p nd on S pt 2 11 n c o nc d � un g�:in fr m F br�a y 19 6, th lett r of r nt 'at 956 a v y p tition r . h da he Dre- for r ie w s fi d (A il 2 . 1 .. 56) . Fr om u st 18, 1 56 to ' pt m r 1'\ l 6, there '� a n i t rv l of 1 d y ; n fro Fe ruary 29, 19 6 t o ril 2 , 1956 t1 r s an t . r 1 t rval of 33 days . iti n r had, t r or convu d a o 1 of 48 days b for fil!ng .i p 1 with hi ourt. n� l � th or s nt � pp al a f.l out f tim � it:on r ~;; ont n th t h 1 tt r d d Ju 7. 955 e an n t b d e .e 1 ion t . t in t f Section 7 of Republic A t ro . 1125, a s m as � gn d only by th ctin.., hi f f th ent epart nt o th ur au of In ernal . venu � It a o 1 in b ~ 1 of th respon- dent . find thi~ vi ithout m rit. T r qu st of p ition r for recon id r ti n dat a o- r u ry 10 1 5~ v addre s ' t "Th �.ono:t ol � Th . ol l c tor of Intern 1 v ue� and t sa s of ns Ne ed y t c: tin Chi f th sessm n D - 287
.�� � 258 , ar me t of he .e urea � h presu p ion i � that the Ac in Chief of h Ass nt par ent as author z d to act for and in a1f of lect r as in fact th . latter c n �der d th sa as h dec s on. ( r s ond nt ' s 1 tter dated ebr ry 13 195 , Ann x J 1 otion t o Di rnis � Fu thermore as w v alre dy dv rted to bov , -th c i ion of r spon ent wh ch i app lable o rt is t asse ment hie p titian r sou ht to b c n d r d in his le ter of f bruary o, 1955. !N VI� OF THE F'""..""""""'~�~~ finding th "r otion to D� is n r toriou th p tition tor revi should be� t i h eby. dismissed~ ith costs a ain t p titioner. 0 � il � July 31. 956. ''
More in CTA Resolutions
- PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. GREEN MONEY TREE LENDING CORPORATION, CHARLES RENZI C. AYSON and ANNE MARJERRIE S. DOMINGO (Green Money Tree Lending Corp., 22F The World Trade Centre, 330 Sen. Gil Puyat Ave. Brgy. Bel-Air, Makati City, 1209)(CTA Case No. O-1068)
- BANCO DE ORO UNIVERSAL BANK v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7413)
- CTA Case No. 4232 (Resolution)(CTA Case No. 4232)
- CTA Case No. EB CRIM-31 (Resolution on MR)(CTA Case No. EB CRIM-31)
- RIO TUBA NICKEL MINING CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (CIR) and the Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs as Collecting Agent of the CIR(CTA Case No. 9459)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. BARRIO FIESTA MANUFACTURING CORPORATION(CTA Case No. EB 2186)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. OMYA CHEMICAL MERCHANTS, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 1593)
- PHIL. GOLD PROCESSING & REFINING CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8697)
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.