Scribd
Upload
228 views1 page

Cir v. Bpi

1) Citytrust Banking Corporation (CBC) filed tax returns for 1986 and executed waivers of the statute of limitations. 2) In 1991, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) issued a Pre-Assessment Notice against CBC for deficiency taxes and assessments. CBC filed protests against these. 3) In 2011, the CIR issued a warrant against the Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI), as the successor-in-interest to CBC. BPI filed a petition for review with the Court of Tax Appeals.

Uploaded by

lucky
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
228 views1 page

Cir v. Bpi

1) Citytrust Banking Corporation (CBC) filed tax returns for 1986 and executed waivers of the statute of limitations. 2) In 1991, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) issued a Pre-Assessment Notice against CBC for deficiency taxes and assessments. CBC filed protests against these. 3) In 2011, the CIR issued a warrant against the Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI), as the successor-in-interest to CBC. BPI filed a petition for review with the Court of Tax Appeals.

Uploaded by

lucky
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

 
  Petitioner 
,
v.
 
BANK OF THE PHILIPPINEISLANDS
,
  Respondent 
.
G.R. No. 224327, June 11, 2018
 The facts follow.Citytrust Banking Corporation (CBC ) filed its Annual Income Tax Returns for its
Regular Banking Unit,and Foreign Currency Deposit Unit for taxable year 1986 on April 15,
1987.CBC executed Waivers of the Statute of Limitations under the National Internal Revenue Code ( NIRC ).
On March 7, 1991, petitioner CIR issued a Pre-Assessment Notice ( PAN ) against CBC for deficiencytaxes,
among which is for deficiency Income Tax. The counsel for CBC filed its protest against the PAN.Petitioner
issued a Letter, with attached Assessment Notices, demanding for the payment of thedeficiency taxes within
thirty (30) days from receipt thereof. The counsel for CBC filed its Protest againstthe assessments
on May 27, 1991 and another Protest on February 17, 1992.Consequently, on September 21, 2011, petitioner
issued a Warrant of Distraint and/or Levy againstrespondent BPI which prompted the latter to file a Petition for
Review with the CTA on October 7, 2011.

ISSUE: W/N CTA acquired jurisdiction over the case for respondent's failure to contest the assessmentsmade
against it by the Bureau of Internal Revenue ( BIR) within the period prescribed by lawPetitioner argues
that the CTA did not acquire jurisdiction over the case for respondent's failure to contestthe
assessments made against it by the Bureau of Internal Revenue ( BIR) within the period prescribed bylaw.
Petitioner also contends that by the principle of estoppel, respondent is not allowed to raise thedefense of
prescription against the efforts of the government to collect the tax assessed against it.

HELD:
The petition lacks merit.An assessment becomes final and unappealable if within thirty (30) days from receipt of
the assessment,the taxpayer fails to file his or her protest requesting for reconsideration or reinvestigation as
provided inSection 229 of the NIRC, thus: Such assessment may be protested administratively by
filing a request for reconsideration orreinvestigation in such form and manner as may be
prescribed by implementing regulations withinthirty (30) days from receipt of the
assessment; otherwise, the assessment shall become final andunappealable.
 
If the protest is denied in whole and in part, the individual, association or corporation
adverselyaffected by the decision on the protest may appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals
within thirty (30)days from receipt of the said decision; otherwise, the decision shall
become final, executory anddemandable.
 Petitioner insists that respondent failed to elevate the tax assessment against it to the CTA within therequired
period. Respondent, on the other hand, claims that it never received any final decision on thedisputed
assessment from petitioner granting or denying the same, whether in whole or in part.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy