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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 191 views

    X

    Uploaded by

    SophiaFrancescaEspinosa
    This document summarizes a case called Collector v. Reyes. It does not provide the full case but cites it in relation to two issues: 1) That books of account may be admissible as evidence in tax cases but are not necessarily truthful on their own. 2) That the 10-year prescriptive period for filing a tax collection case starts from the discovery of falsity, fraud, or omission, not just from the filing of the tax return. Several other cases cite Collector v. Reyes in support of the propositions that tax assessments are presumed correct unless proven otherwise by the taxpayer, and that the taxpayer has a duty to fully disclose all relevant information.

    Copyright:

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

    X

    Uploaded by

    SophiaFrancescaEspinosa
    191 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a case called Collector v. Reyes. It does not provide the full case but cites it in relation to two issues: 1) That books of account may be admissible as evidence in tax cases but are not necessarily truthful on their own. 2) That the 10-year prescriptive period for filing a tax collection case starts from the discovery of falsity, fraud, or omission, not just from the filing of the tax return. Several other cases cite Collector v. Reyes in support of the propositions that tax assessments are presumed correct unless proven otherwise by the taxpayer, and that the taxpayer has a duty to fully disclose all relevant information.

    Original Description:

    x

    Original Title

    x

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a case called Collector v. Reyes. It does not provide the full case but cites it in relation to two issues: 1) That books of account may be admissible as evidence in tax cases but are not necessarily truthful on their own. 2) That the 10-year prescriptive period for filing a tax collection case starts from the discovery of falsity, fraud, or omission, not just from the filing of the tax return. Several other cases cite Collector v. Reyes in support of the propositions that tax assessments are presumed correct unless proven otherwise by the taxpayer, and that the taxpayer has a duty to fully disclose all relevant information.

    Copyright:

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

    X

    Uploaded by

    SophiaFrancescaEspinosa
    This document summarizes a case called Collector v. Reyes. It does not provide the full case but cites it in relation to two issues: 1) That books of account may be admissible as evidence in tax cases but are not necessarily truthful on their own. 2) That the 10-year prescriptive period for filing a tax collection case starts from the discovery of falsity, fraud, or omission, not just from the filing of the tax return. Several other cases cite Collector v. Reyes in support of the propositions that tax assessments are presumed correct unless proven otherwise by the taxpayer, and that the taxpayer has a duty to fully disclose all relevant information.

    Copyright:

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

    University of the Philippines College of Law

    CPE, 1-D

    Topic ACCOUNTING PERIODS AND METHODS


    Case No. Case No. / Date
    Case Name COLLECTOR V. REYES
    Ponente PONENTE, j.

    RELEVANT FACTS
    NOTE: Chito and I couldn’t find the case in Escra or in Google. It might be an unpublished SC ruling; will try to ask
    the library to confirm. Will just put what other cases cited from it. If you’re able to find the case, just message
    me. -Carli

    Case name What it cited from Collector v. Reyes


    Consolidated Books of account may therefore be admissible under the rule. In tax cases, however, this
    Mines v. CTA Court appears not to place too high a probative value on them, considering the
    G.R. No. Nos. L- statement in the case of Collector of Internal Revenue v. Reyes 32that "books of account
    18843 and L-18844 do not prove per se that they are veracious; in fact they may be more consistent than
    August 29, 1974 truthful." Indeed, books of account may be used to carry out a plan of tax evasion.
    Republic v. General
    Sales Supply Co. We stress the first statement which reads "Except as provided in the succeeding section,"
    G.R. No. L- 18543 and the succeeding section clearly provides:

    October 31, 1968 SEC. 332. Exceptions as to period of limitation of assessment and collection of
    taxes. — (a) In the case of a false or fraudulent return with intent to evade tax or
    of a failure to file a return, the tax may be assessed, or a proceeding in court for
    the collection of such tax may be begun without assessment, any time within ten
    years after the discovery of the falsity fraud, or omission.

    There is no doubt that the income tax returns filed by the appellant corporation were
    false and fraudulent with the intent to evade payment of taxes. Hence, under Section 332
    of the Tax Code, the 10-year prescriptive period within which to file action in court shall
    commence not from the filing of the income tax returns nor from the assessment of the
    tax but from the "discovery of the falsity, fraud or omission." We said so in the case
    of Collector of Intemal Revenue vs. Aurelio P. Reyes, G.R. Nos. L-11534 and L-11558,
    November 25, 1958:

    This finding of fraud, also disposes adversely to the taxpayer, of his contention
    that reassessment of his taxes was barred because more than five years had
    elapsed since the disputed returns were filed. Under Section 332 of the Internal
    Revenue Code, collection of taxes may be started within ten years from the
    discovery of the fraud.

    Sy Po v. CTA
    G.R. No. 81446 In the case of Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Reyes, 6 we ruled:
    August 18, 1988
    Where the taxpayer is appealing to the tax court on the ground that the
    Collector's assessment is erroneous, it is incumbent upon him to prove
    there what is the correct and just liability by a full and fair disclosure of
    all pertinent data in his possession. Otherwise, if the taxpayer confines
    University of the Philippines College of Law
    CPE, 1-D

    himself to proving that the tax assessment is wrong, the tax court
    proceedings would settle nothing, and the way would be left open for
    subsequent assessments and appeals in interminable succession.

    Tax assessments by tax examiners are presumed correct and made in good faith. The
    taxpayer has the duty to prove otherwise. 7 In the absence of proof of any irregularities in
    the performance of duties, an assessment duly made by a Bureau of Internal Revenue
    examiner and approved by his superior officers will not be disturbed. 8 All presumptions
    are in favor of the correctness of tax assessments. 9

    ISSUE AND RATIO DECIDENDI

    Issue Ratio
    W/N … YES/NO.

    1. Reason 1.

    2. Reason 2.

    3. Reason 3.

    RULING

    You might also like