Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 58 views

    Ipekdijian

    Uploaded by

    vmanalo16
    1. Ipekdjian Merchandising Co. was assessed around P97,502.25 in compensating taxes and surcharges by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for importing gold chains that were later converted to gold bullion. 2. Ipekdjian appealed this decision to the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA), which affirmed the Commissioner's decision. Ipekdjian then appealed to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the appeal. 3. Ipekdjian sought to reopen the case with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), but the CTA dismissed it, asserting res judicata from the prior BTA decision. Ipekdjian challenges whether res judicata

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Ipekdijian

    Uploaded by

    vmanalo16
    58 views2 pages
    1. Ipekdjian Merchandising Co. was assessed around P97,502.25 in compensating taxes and surcharges by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for importing gold chains that were later converted to gold bullion. 2. Ipekdjian appealed this decision to the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA), which affirmed the Commissioner's decision. Ipekdjian then appealed to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the appeal. 3. Ipekdjian sought to reopen the case with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), but the CTA dismissed it, asserting res judicata from the prior BTA decision. Ipekdjian challenges whether res judicata

    Original Description:

    Ipekdijian

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Ipekdjian Merchandising Co. was assessed around P97,502.25 in compensating taxes and surcharges by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for importing gold chains that were later converted to gold bullion. 2. Ipekdjian appealed this decision to the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA), which affirmed the Commissioner's decision. Ipekdjian then appealed to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the appeal. 3. Ipekdjian sought to reopen the case with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), but the CTA dismissed it, asserting res judicata from the prior BTA decision. Ipekdjian challenges whether res judicata

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    58 views2 pages

    Ipekdijian

    Uploaded by

    vmanalo16
    1. Ipekdjian Merchandising Co. was assessed around P97,502.25 in compensating taxes and surcharges by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for importing gold chains that were later converted to gold bullion. 2. Ipekdjian appealed this decision to the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA), which affirmed the Commissioner's decision. Ipekdjian then appealed to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the appeal. 3. Ipekdjian sought to reopen the case with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), but the CTA dismissed it, asserting res judicata from the prior BTA decision. Ipekdjian challenges whether res judicata

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    IPEKDJIAN MERCHANDISING CO., INC.

    v CTA, CIR
    9 SCRA 72
    MAKALINTAL; Sept 30, 1963

    FACTS
    - Commissioner of Internal Revenue assessed from Ipekdjian P97,502.25 as
    compensating tax and surcharge on gold chains imported by it, which were later
    converted into gold bullion, + P200 compromise penalty.
    - Ipekdjian appealed to Board of Tax Appeals. BTA affirmed Commissioners judgment.
    THIS IS BTA CASE NO. 10
    - Ipekdjian appealed to SC but SC dismissed. Ipekdjian sought to reinstate its appeal
    with SC but it was denied.
    - Ipekdjian sought to reopen case with CTA. CTA dismissed. MFR was also denied.
    - Ipekdjian made partial payment, but later it filed with Commissioner a claim for refund
    of the same. This was denied.
    - Ipekdjian filed petition for review in CTA. THIS IS CTA CASE NO 374
    - Commissioner filed his answer in the CTA case, raising the affirmative defense of res
    judicata.
    - Motion for execution of judgment in BTA case was granted by CTA. Hence this petition
    for certiorari.

    ISSUE
    WON BTA case operates to bar the CTA case
    (Ipekdjian argues that res judicata applies only to judgment of courts, not to decisions of
    administrative agencies.)

    HELD
    1. YES
    - Requisites, res judicata:
    - final former judgment
    - court has jurisdiction over subject matter and parties
    - judgment on merits
    - between first and second actions:
    - identity of parties
    - identity of subject matter
    - identity of cause of action
    - The more equitable attitude is to allow extension of defense to decisions of bodies
    upon whom judicial powers have been conferred.
    - In both cases, issue is the same: WON appellant is liable for compensating tax.

    FACTS:
    1. Respondent Collector of Internal Revenue assessed the sum of
    P97,502.25, as compensating tax and surcharge, due from
    petitioner lpekdjian Merchandising Co., Inc., on its imported
    gold chains, not actually sold but which were converted into
    gold bullion and later sold by petitioner as such plus the amount
    of P200.00 as penalty for petitioners violation of section 190 of
    the Tax Code.
    2. Petitioner appealed this decision to the Board of Tax Appeals
    being BTA Case No. 10. The said Board having affirmed the
    decision of respondent, petitioner appealed the decision. The
    Court dismissed the appeal.
    3. After the resolution of this Court had become final and
    executory, petitioner sought to reinstate its appeal in this Court,
    but said petition for reinstatement was denied.
    4. Petitioner tried to reopen its case in this Court, by having it
    docketed for hearing as CTA Case No. 107. on the ground of
    lack of jurisdiction for having been filed beyond 30 days from
    the receipt of the assessment made by respondent.
    5. Petitioner MR of said dismissal, but the motion was denied. The
    petitioner made a partial payment, in the amount of P5,000.00.
    6. The respondent filed the present motion for execution of
    judgment before the CTA, praying that petitioner be ordered to
    pay the balance of P92,505.25, as compensating tax and
    surcharge, plus P200.00 as penalty.
    7. A resolution was promulgated ordering the Clerk of Court to
    issue the writ of execution.

    You might also like