Propriety of the Imposition of the 25% Surcharge for Late Payment

January 6, 1959 BIR RULING NO. 012-59 The Revenue Operations Executive (Assessment) B. I. R., Manila S i r : There is returned herewith the cases of Mr. Emmanuel K. Villanueva (Stateside Commercial) and Akvill Trading. Opinion is requested as to the propriety of the imposition of the 25% surcharge for late payment and the 50% surcharge on account of fraud. The articles in question were imported as household effects on which only the compensating tax was paid. The articles were, however, found to have been sold, so that, therefore, the advance sales tax should have been paid instead of the compensating tax. The importation of the articles in question as household effects is clearly tainted with fraud. Under the circumstances, and considering that payment of the advance sales tax was evaded thru mis-representations, the imposition of the 25% and 50% surcharges is in order. cdt Very truly yours, (SGD.) MELECIO R. DOMINGO Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue