Skip to main content

BIR Ruling No. 102-82

BIR Ruling No. 102-82 • Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Issuances • Rulings (Numbered) • Apr 2, 1982

Full text

April 2, 1982 BIR RULING NO. 102-82 192-2 000-00 102-82 Pacwood, Inc. P.O. Box 1977 M a n i l a Attention: Mr . Oscar Montalibano Comptroller Gentlemen : This refers to your letters dated May 7 and 15, 1981 and August 17, 1981, requesting reconsideration of BIR Ruling dated October 11, 1976 which held that the treatment applied to your wood poles and lumbers prior to the sale thereof constitutes manufacturing. In reply, please be informed that after a restudy of the facts of the case and the law and jurisprudence pertinent thereto, this Office has finally decided and hereby holds that you do not come within the purview of a manufacturer in the process of subjecting your woods poles and lumbers to pressure-treatment with wood preservatives either by oil-borne (creosole) or water-borne (tanalith) under Section 167(x) of the Tax Code, as amended. Accordingly, said BIR Ruling dated October 11, 1976 is hereby revoked. The prior ruling of March 9, 1976 holding you a dealer of round poles and lumber subjects to the graduated annual fixed tax prescribed in Section 182(A)(2) [now Section 192(2)] of the Tax Code, is therefore, affirmed. cdtech In this connection, the tax credit in the amount of P212,887.87 granted you on May 27, 1976 on the basis of the ruling of March 9, 1976 is legal and proper and, therefore, the application of a portion thereof in payment of year corporate income tax liability of P120,590.00 for the 1st quarter of 1976 is valid. Such being the case, the assessment issued against you on December 11, 1976 in the amount of P120,590.00, plus interest of P1,507.30 and penalty of P50.00, or a total of P122,147.38 is withdrawn. However, in view of your letter of August 17, 1981, the excess tax credit (difference between P212,887.87 and P120,590.00) not yet applied is hereby invalidated. Likewise, this Office takes note of your renunciation of any claim for refund of whatever excess payment of sales tax arising from the revocation of our ruling of October 11, 1976. Very truly yours, RUBEN B. ANCHETA Acting Commissioner

Ask what this means for your situation

The assistant quotes the passage it relies on and links the source, so you can check every figure it gives you.