Asiatrust Development Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

SPECIAL FIRST DIVISION [C.T.A. CASE NO. 6209. March 16, 2010.] ASIATRUST DEVELOPMENT BANK , petitioner , vs . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , respondent . AMENDED DECISION CASANOVA , J p : For resolution is petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration filed on February 11, 2009, seeking the reconsideration of this Court's Decision promulgated on January 20, 2009, the dispositive portion of which states: ACIDTE " WHEREFORE , premises considered, the instant Petition for Review is hereby PARTIALLY GRANTED . Accordingly, Assessment Notices issued against petitioner for deficiency documentary stamp, final withholding, expanded withholding, and fringe benefits tax assessments the fiscal year ended June 30, 1996 are VOID for being issues beyond the prescriptive period allowed by law. The Assessment Notices issued by respondent against petitioner for deficiency income, documentary stamp regular, documentary stamp trust, and fringe benefits tax assessments for the fiscal years ended June 30, 1997 & 1998 are hereby ordered CANCELLED and WITHDRAWN . Moreover, petitioner's deficiency documentary stamp tax IBCL assessment for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1997 is ordered CANCELLED and WITHDRAWN . However, petitioner's deficiency documentary stamp tax Special Savings Account assessments for the fiscal years ended June 30, 1997 & 1998, and deficiency documentary stamp tax IBCL and deficiency final withholding tax trust assessments for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1998, in the aggregate amount of P142,777,785.91 are hereby AFFIRMED . The said amount is broken down as follows: Fiscal Year 1997 Documentary Stamp Tax Industry Issue P39,163,539.57 Fiscal Year 1998 Final Withholding Tax Trust 10,183,367.80 Documentary Stamp Tax Industry Issue 93,430,878.54 Total Deficiency Tax P142,777,785.91 ============== SO ORDERED ." Petitioner moves for the reconsideration of the assailed Decision based on the following grounds: "I. THIS HONORABLE COURT DID NOT GIVE CREDENCE TO THE PETITIONER'S STATEMENT THAT IT FILED APPLICATIONS FOR THE ABATEMENT AND PAYMENT OF THE BASIC FINAL WITHHOLDING TAX ON TRUST DEPARTMENT PLACEMENTS II. THIS HONORABLE COURT DID NOT GIVE CREDENCE TO THE PETITIONER'S STATEMENT THAT IT HAD AVAILED OF THE TAX AMNESTY LAW UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9480 THDIaC III. CONSIDERING THAT PETITIONER CAN SUBMIT PROOF THAT IT HAD AVAILED OF THE TAX AMNESTY LAW, IT IS THEREFORE IMMUNIZED FROM THE ALLEGED DOCUMENTARY TAX ASSESSMENTS RAISED BY THE BIR" Petitioner likewise attached documents as annexes to its Motion for Reconsideration, particularly, photocopies of its Tax Amnesty Return, Tax Amnesty Payment Form, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Official Receipt, Notice of Availment of Tax Amnesty, and Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Networth (SALN) as of June 30, 2005, 1 in support of the second and third assigned errors. In a Resolution promulgated on July 6, 2009, this Court found the first assigned error unmeritorious, but allowed petitioner to present and to formally offer to the Court the said documents attached to its Motion for evaluation and consideration. Consequently, the resolution of the second and third assigned errors was held in abeyance. A hearing was then set for the presentation and for the marking of petitioner's additional documentary evidence. Petitioner presented Exhibits "F" to "I", which are certified true copies of the original documents. 2 Petitioner filed its Formal Offer of Evidence on September 22, 2009, submitting Exhibits "F" (Tax Amnesty Return), "G" (Tax Amnesty Payment Form), "H" (DBP BTR-BIR Tax Payment Deposit Slip), and "I" (Notice of Availment of Tax Amnesty). Respondent filed his Comment (On Petitioner's Formal Offer of Evidence) on October 20, 2009, manifesting his lack of objection to the admission of petitioner's additional evidence. This Court admitted Exhibits "F" to "I" and ordered petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration submitted for resolution in Resolution dated November 10, 2009. In a Resolution dated December 3, 2009, this Court again held in abeyance the resolution of petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration to enable petitioner to mark, identify, and formally offer its Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth (SALN) as of June 30, 2005. Petitioner filed its Supplemental Formal Offer of Evidence on February 2, 2010, offering as additional evidence Exhibits "I-1" (Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth as of June 30, 2005) and "J" (Certification issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue dated August 20, 2009). Respondent manifested, in his Comment (On Petitioner's Supplemental Formal Offer of Evidence) filed on February 4, 2010, that he has no objection to the admission of Exhibits "I-1" and "J". HCTEDa The Court admitted Exhibits "I-1" and "J" and ordered petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration submitted for resolution via Resolution dated February 25, 2010. Hence, this Amended Decision. Since the first assigned error was already found by this Court as untenable in the Resolution dated July 6, 2009, only the afore-quoted second and third grounds will be resolved. In order to prove its claim that it had properly availed of the Tax Amnesty Program of the government, petitioner presented and formally offered the following documents: 1. Notice of Availment of Tax Amnesty dated March 6, 2008; 2. Tax Amnesty Return (BIR Form No. 2116) dated March 6, 2008; 3. DBP BTR-BIR Tax Payment Deposit Slip dated March 6, 2008; 4. Tax Amnesty Payment Form (BIR Form No. 0617) dated March 6, 2008; and 5. Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth (SALN) as of June 30, 2005. These documents demonstrate that on March 6, 2008, petitioner availed of the Tax Amnesty Program; paid the amnesty tax based on its Networth as of June 30, 2005; and filed the corresponding documents required for the availment of the tax amnesty under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9480. Consequently, petitioner is entitled to the immunities and privileges granted in Section 6 of the Tax Amnesty Law, to wit: "Sec. 6. Immunities and Privileges. Those who availed themselves of the tax amnesty under Section 5 hereof, and have fully complied with all its conditions shall be entitled to the following immunities and privileges: 1. The taxpayer shall be immune from the payment of taxes, as well as addition thereto, and the appurtenant civil, criminal or administrative penalties under the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended, arising from the failure to pay any and all internal revenue taxes for taxable year 2005 and prior years. IHCSTE xxx xxx xxx" These immunities and privileges have been affirmed by the Supreme Court in the case of Philippine Banking Corporation (now: Global Business Bank, Inc.) vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , 3 when it held that: "Records show that Metrobank, a qualified tax amnesty applicant, has duly complied with the requirements enumerated in RA 9480, as implemented by DO 29-07 and RMC 19-2008. Considering that the completion of these requirements shall be deemed full compliance with the tax amnesty program, the law mandates that the taxpayer shall thereafter be immune from the payment of taxes, and additions thereto, as well as the appurtenant civil, criminal or administrative penalties under the NIRC of 1997, as amended, arising from the failure to pay any and all internal revenue taxes for taxable year 2005 and prior years." Inasmuch as petitioner has fully complied with the prescribed requisites of R.A. No. 9480, it is deemed a duly qualified tax amnesty applicant; consequently, petitioner's deficiency documentary stamp tax liabilities are extinguished, while its deficiency final withholding tax liability stays, since it is specifically excluded by R.A. No. 9480. 4 WHEREFORE , premises considered, petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration is hereby PARTIALLY GRANTED and this Court's Decision dated January 20, 2009 is hereby MODIFIED . Accordingly, the above-captioned case as regards petitioner's liability for deficiency documentary stamp tax is CLOSED and TERMINATED , subject to the provisions of R.A. No. 9480. However, petitioner's liability for deficiency final withholding tax assessment for fiscal year ended June 30, 1998, subject of this litigation, in the amount of P10,183,367.80, is hereby REAFFIRMED . SO ORDERED . (SGD.) CAESAR A. CASANOVA Associate Justice Ernesto D. Acosta, P.J. and Lovell R. Bautista, J., concur. Footnotes 1. Annexes "F", "G", "H", and "I", Motion for Reconsideration. 2. Docket, p. 836. 3. G.R. No. 170574, January 30, 2009. 4. "Sec. 8. Exceptions. The tax amnesty provided in Section 5 hereof shall not extend to the following persons or cases existing as of the effectivity of this Act: 1. Withholding agents with respects to their withholding tax liabilities;".