Republic of The Philippines Court of Tax Appeals Quezon City
Republic of The Philippines Court of Tax Appeals Quezon City
Republic of The Philippines Court of Tax Appeals Quezon City
DELISH EATERY
Petitioner,
-versusMANOG SUKOT BUWIS,
Regional Director,
Bureau of Internal Revenue
Respondent.
x------------------------------------x
COMES NOW, herein the Petitioner, through the Undersigned Counsels, and unto
this Honorable Court, most respectfully submit this Petition, to wit:
THE PARTIES
The Petitioner Delish Eatery, is a partnership formed and organized under
the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, with business address of 14th Lacson
Street, Bacolod City.
The Respondent Manog Sukot Buwis, is the Regional Director of the Bureau
of Internal Revenue, located at Bacolod City, the office mandated by law with the
assessment and collection of all national internal revenue taxes, fees and charges,
and the enforcement of all forfeitures, penalties and fines connected therewith
including the execution of judgments in all cases decided in its favor by the Court
of Tax Appeals and the ordinary courts.
LEGAL ARGUMENTATION
1. Whether or not the Final Assessment Notice dated August 1, 2016 as well as
the Details of Discrepancy for Taxable Year 2015 issued by the BIR to
Delish Eatery is valid and correct
Based on Sec. 228 of the National Internal Revenue Code under Protesting of
Assessment, when the Commissioner or his duly authorized representative finds
that proper taxes should be assessed, he shall first notify the taxpayer of his
findings. The taxpayers shall be informed in writing of the law and the facts on
which the assessment is made; otherwise, the assessment shall be void.
The case of CIR v. Enron Subic Power Corp. notes that, In [this] case, [the
CIR] merely issued a formal assessment and indicated therein the supposed tax,
surcharge, interest and compromise penalty due thereon. The Revenue Officers of
the [the CIR] in the issuance of the Final Assessment Notice did not provide Enron
with the written bases of the law and facts on which the subject assessment is
based. [The CIR] did not bother to explain how it arrived at such an assessment.
Moreso, he failed to mention the specific provision of the Tax Code or rules and
regulations which were not complied with by Enron.
In the case of Delish Eatery, the BIR merely itemized the computation for the
2015 Income Tax Payable without stating the laws and the facts on which the
assessment was made. Furthermore, there was no supporting basis for the inclusion
of undeclared sales to ABC Beer Corp., XYZ Bottlers, and 123 Milling Corp., per Third
Party Information in addition to the undisclosed sale of shabu as taxable income.
In view of the absence of a fair opportunity for Delish Eatery to be informed of
the legal and factual bases of the assessment against it, the assessment in question
should be deemed void.
Pertaining to the subject of the Third Party Information in assessing the tax
deficiency, the BIR also failed to state the legal basis of the Commissioner as
against Delish Eatery. The respondent did not present any legal and factual bases in
the inclusion of undeclared sale of shabu for the taxable year of 2015 amounting
to Php100,000,000. No evidence was supplied to justify its inclusion in the income
of the petitioner.
On the matter of the expenses claimed on Cost of Services and Comm. Light &
Water, disallowing such as a deduction, no law nor fact to which the disallowance
was based on was ever mentioned by the respondent in its final assessment notice
and the details of discrepancy. Absent any legal and factual evidence to support
such disallowance, the same shall be invalid.
Therefore, the 2015 Tax Deficiency Assessment issued by the BIR to Delish
Eatery is in clear violation of Sec. 228 of the National Internal Revenue Code and
shall be deemed void.
We, Delish Eatery, a partnership organized and existing under and by virtue of the
laws of the Philippines, with principal place of business at 14th Lacson Street, Bacolod City,
Philippines, after being sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say:
That we are the petitioners in the above-entitled case; That we have caused
the preparation of the above petition and we have read the same and know the
contents thereof; That the allegations contained therein are true and correct of our
own personal knowledge.
That we further certify that: (a) we have not theretofore commenced any
other action or proceeding or filed any claim involving the same issues or matter
in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of our knowledge,
no such action or proceeding is pending therein; (c) if we should thereafter learn
that the same or similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or quasi-judicial
agency, we undertake to report such fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court
or agency wherein the original pleading and sworn certification contemplated
herein have been filed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this 19 October
2016 at Bacolod City, Negros Occidental, Philippines.
_______________________
(Sgd) AFFIANT
PRAYER
Atty. Mary Anne Caete Atty. Mary Jo Decolongon Atty. Kevin Patrick Degayo
Counsels for the Plaintiffs
28/F Suite 2800-2804 THE TRUMP TOWER
Upper McKinley Hill, Bonifacio Global City,
Taguig, Metro Manila