Propriety of Salary Resumption of Revenue Collection Agents Charged with Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty

November 17, 1999 BIR RULING NO. 178-99 Ms. Myrna E. Sobremonte Chief, Accounting Division This Bureau M a d a m : This refers to your letter dated September 9, 1999 which was indorsed by the Assistant Commissioner, Legal Service to the Chief, Personnel Inquiry Division which was in turn indorsed to this Office for legal opinion on the propriety of the resumption of salaries of Ms. Nenita Presto and Mr. Rodolfo Antoy based on the Motion for Reconsideration filed with the Personnel Inquiry Division on August 18, 1998 and July 23, 1998, respectively. Records show that Ms. Nenita Presto was a Revenue Collection Agent of Revenue Office No. 108, Kidapawan, North Cotabato, assigned in the Municipalities of Antipas and M'lang, Cotabato; that she was administratively charged for Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty for incurring a cash shortage in the aggregate amount of P352,161.67 consisting of cash and accounts covering the period January 1993 to December 15, 1995; that in an undated Decision rendered by the BIR which was confirmed by the Secretary of Finance on March 18, 1998, respondent Nenita R. Presto was found guilty of Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty and was meted a penalty of dismissal pursuant to Section 23, Rule XIV of the Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations; that a Motion for Reconsideration was filed by respondent Nenita Presto on August 18, 1998; and that RDO Muslimen L. Maca-Agir, Al Hadj, Revenue District Officer, RDO No. 108, Kidapawan City issued a Certification to the effect that Ms. Nenita R. Presto has rendered actual services for the period covering August, 1998 up to June 02, 1999 for the purpose of her claim for backwages and resumption of her salary. Likewise, Mr. Rodolfo B. Antoy was a Revenue Collection Agent of Revenue District Office No. 108, Kidapawan, North Cotabato, assigned in the Municipality of Matalam, Cotabato; that he was administratively charged for Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty for incurring a cash shortage in the aggregate amount of P1,074,002.84 consisting of cash and accounts covering the period January 1993 to November 30, 1995 and for failure to regularly remit his revenue collections in violation of Joint Circular 1-81 of the Department of Finance and Commission on Audit, and Sections 107 and 111 of the Government Accounting and Auditing Manual (Vol. 1) and Section 44 Book VI, Administrative Code, to the damage and prejudice of the revenue service; that in a Decision rendered by the BIR dated June 25, 1998 which was confirmed by the Secretary of Finance on April 1, 1998, respondent Rodolfo B. Antoy was found guilty of Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty and was meted a penalty of dismissal pursuant to Section 23, Rule XIV of the Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations; that a Motion for Reconsideration was filed by respondent Rodolfo B. Antoy on July 23, 1998; and that RDO Muslimen L. Maca-Agir, Al Hadj, Revenue District Officer, RDO No. 108, Kidapawan City issued a Certification to the effect that Mr. Rodolfo B. Antoy has rendered actual service for the period covering July 10, 1998 up to June 9, 1999 for the purpose of his claim for backwages and resumption of his salary. Quoted hereunder are pertinent portions of CSC Resolution No. 990933 dated May 6, 1999, to wit: "xxx xxx xxx "Relevant to the instant case is Section 47(2), Chapter VII, Book V, Title I, Subtitle A of the Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292), which reads as follows: "(2) The Secretaries and heads of agencies and instrumentalities, provinces, cities and municipalities shall have jurisdiction to investigate and decide matters involving disciplinary action against officers and employees under their jurisdiction. Their decisions shall be final in case the penalty imposed is suspension for not more than thirty (30) days salary. In case the decision rendered by a bureau or office head is appealable to the Commission, the same may be initially appealed to the department and finally to the Commission and pending appeal, the same shall be executory only after confirmation by the Secretary concerned. "Applicable by analogy is the decision of the Commission in CSC Resolution No. 95-2086 dated March 21, 1995, which reads as follows: "On the issue of the effectivity of his dismissal, Sections 50 and 51, Rule XIV of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 provide that the decision of the Commission shall be immediately executory unless a motion for reconsideration is seasonably filed or a restraining order or preliminary injunction is issued by the Supreme Court if the decision is brought to it on certiorari. Hence, movant 's dismissal should take effect after his receipt of the resolution of his Motion for Reconsideration. During the pendency of his case and his motion for reconsideration, he may continue reporting for work and thus be entitled to the salary for the actual days he had actually worked. xxx xxx xxx "Evidently, the Motion for Reconsideration was filed within the fifteen (15) day reglementary period. Consequently, the execution of said decision is stayed pending the resolution of Poblador's Motion. In the meantime, she is still entitled to receive her salary and other benefits provided she rendered actual services. "WHEREFORE, the Commission hereby rules and so holds that pending the resolution of the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Perla B. Poblador, the decision of then Secretary of Finance Salvador M. Enriquez is stayed /held in abeyance. Accordingly, Poblador is still entitled to her salary and other benefits for actual services rendered." Records show that the Decision of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue finding Ms. Nenita R. Presto guilty of Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty and confirmed by the Secretary of Finance was received on August 6, 1998 and a Motion for Reconsideration was seasonably filed on August 18, 1998 or within twelve (12) days from receipt of the Decision. Likewise, Mr. Rodolfo B. Antoy received the Decision of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and confirmed by the Secretary of Finance finding him guilty of Grave Misconduct and Dishonesty on July 9, 1998 and a Motion for Reconsideration was seasonably filed on July 23, 1998 or within fourteen (14) days from receipt of the Decision. Accordingly, since the Motion for Reconsideration were individually filed by Ms. Nenita R. Presto and Mr. Rodolfo B. Antoy within the reglementary period, the execution of the respective decision shall be stayed pending the resolution of their individual Motion for Reconsideration. While they were awaiting for the resolution of their Motions for Reconsideration, Ms. Presto and Mr. Antoy rendered actual services in RDO 108, Kidapawan City, as evidenced by the two (2) Certifications issued by RDO Muslimen L. Maca-Agir, Al. Hadj. Thus, applying the aforequoted pronouncement of the Civil Service Commission, Ms. Presto and Mr. Antoy are entitled to the resumption of the payment of their salaries during the period covering the actual services rendered while their Motions for Reconsideration have not yet been resolved, i.e. period covering August, 1998 up to June 02, 1999 for Ms. Presto and period covering July 10, 1998 up to June 9, 1999 for Mr. Antoy. Please be guided accordingly. Very truly yours, (SGD.) BEETHOVEN L. RUALO Commissioner of Internal Revenue