Chevron Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

FIRST DIVISION [C.T.A. CASE NO. 8241. August 11, 2015.] CHEVRON HOLDINGS, INC. [formerly CALTEX (ASIA) LIMITED] , petitioner , vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , respondent . AMENDED DECISION DEL ROSARIO , P.J p : This resolves petitioner's " Motion for Partial Reconsideration with Motion for New Trial " filed on September 18, 2013, with respondent's " Comment (To Petitioner's Motion for Partial Reconsideration with Motion for New Trial dated 18 September 2013) " filed on November 04, 2013. Petitioner moves for partial reconsideration of Our Decision dated August 14, 2013, the dispositive portion of which reads, as follows: "WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition for Review is hereby PARTIALLY GRANTED. Accordingly, respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue is hereby ORDERED to REFUND or to ISSUE A TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE in the reduced amount of P4,623,001.60 to petitioner Chevron Holdings, Inc. representing its excess and unutilized input VAT for the four taxable quarters of 2009 attributable to its zero-rated sales for the same period. SO ORDERED." Petitioner's "Motion for Partial Reconsideration with Motion for New Trial" is anchored on the following grounds: (1) Zero-rated transactions are those that are rendered to either persons engaged in business outside the Philippines or persons not engaged in business but are outside the Philippines when the services were performed; (2) Chevron Holdings, Inc. rendered services to its affiliates which are located outside the Philippines when the services were performed; (3) The doctrine in the Burmeister case was taken out of context and misapplied to the present claim for refund; (4) The total amount of zero-rated sales credited to Cabinda Gulf Oil Company Limited ought to be Php36,015,697.05, and not only Php28,378,745.54, as stated in the Decision; and, (5) The attached Articles of Incorporation and company profiles of Chevron Holdings' foreign affiliate customers are akin to newly discovered evidence which shall materially alter the outcome of the case and may therefore be admitted by this Honorable Court. On February 27, 2014, the Court granted petitioner's "Motion for New Trial" and held in abeyance the resolution of petitioner's "Motion for Partial Reconsideration". Petitioner recalled to the witness stand Hyacinth Pacifico-Carreon, the current Optimization Manager of Chevron Holdings, Inc. She identified her Supplemental Judicial Affidavit as Exhibit "UUU" 1 and her signature on page 22 thereof, as Exhibit "UUU-1". 2 She further identified documentary evidence for the petitioner marked as Exhibits "C-116" to "C-133", 3 "HHH" to "HHH-31", 4 "III" to "III-18", 5 "JJJ" to "JJJ-16", 6 "KKK" to "KKK-5", 7 "LLL" to "LLL-12", 8 "RRR-1", 9 "MM-2", 10 "RRR-3", 11 "SSS" to "SSS-11", 12 "TTT" to "TTT-3", 13 and "WWW" to "WWW-1". 14 HESIcT In substance, Pacifico-Carreon testified that she acts as petitioner's Finance Manager 15 and that petitioner is the Regional Operating Headquarters (ROHQ) of Chevron Holdings, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA, serving as a shared center that offers finance, human resources, information technology, and procurement services to its customers. As regards its customers, Pacifico-Carreon explained that petitioner only caters to affiliates, subsidiaries, branches, and divisions under the Chevron group of companies. These customers outsourced or devolved certain functions to the shared services centers, such as petitioner, and streamlined their finance, human resources, information technology, and procurement departments as they no longer employ staff for certain positions and functions. 16 Said witness presented and identified the following documents to prove that petitioner's customers are located outside the Philippines: (1) printed screenshots from Chevron intranet/subgovern site; 17 (2) printed screenshots of the official online websites of the foreign government company registries; 18 and, (3) negative certifications issued by the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 19 To further support petitioner's claim for VAT refund, the witness presented petitioner's VAT Official Receipts and Sales Invoices issued to its local affiliates customers for taxable year 2009, 20 petitioner's Authority to Print Receipt issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), 21 petitioner's Quarterly VAT Return for taxable year 2007, 22 and Certifications from the BIR and the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) that no refund claims were filed by petitioner for the period covering taxable year 2007. 23 On November 26, 2014, the Court admitted all the above-mentioned documentary evidence, except Exhibits "III" to "III-18", "KKK", "KKK-3", and "KKK-5" for petitioner's failure to present the original copies of said documents for comparison, and ordered the parties to submit their simultaneous memoranda. 24 On December 19, 2014, petitioner filed a "Motion for Reconsideration" of the Resolution dated November 26, 2014 denying admission of Exhibits "III" to "III-18", "KKK", "KKK-3", and "KKK-5", 25 which the Court denied in its Resolution dated February 27, 2015. 26 On March 20, 2015, petitioner filed a "Proffer of Excluded Evidence", which the Court noted in a Resolution dated March 31, 2015. 27 Meanwhile, on December 22, 2014, respondent filed a Manifestation stating that she will no longer file a Memorandum. On the other hand, on April 8, 2015, petitioner filed its Memorandum. On May 4, 2015, petitioner's " Motion for Partial Reconsideration " was deemed submitted for resolution. Hence, this Amended Decision. THE COURT'S RULING Whether or not Petitioner's Sales of Services to its Customer-Affiliates are VAT Zero-Rated Petitioner contends that it is entitled to VAT zero-rating under Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, with regard to its sales of services to its customer-affiliates, and prays of this Honorable Court to grant its claim for refund and/or issuance of tax credit certificate in the amount of P51,198,943.08, representing its unutilized and/or unapplied input VAT for the period covering January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009. In this regard, Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended by Republic Act (RA) No. 9337, provides: "SEC. 108. Value-added Tax on Sale of Services and Use or Lease of Properties . caITAC xxx xxx xxx (B) Transactions Subject to Zero Percent (0%) Rate. The following services performed in the Philippines by VAT-registered persons shall be subject to zero percent (0%) rate: xxx xxx xxx (2) Services other than those mentioned in the preceding paragraph rendered to a person engaged in business conducted outside the Philippines or to a nonresident person not engaged in business who is outside the Philippines when the services are performed , the consideration for which is paid for in acceptable foreign currency and accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP);" (Emphasis supplied) In Our Decision, We cited the case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Burmeister and Wain Scandinavian Contractor Mindanao, Inc. 28 to determine whether petitioner's client is doing business outside the Philippines to comply with one of the prescribed requisites for zero-rating. Petitioner contends, however, that a correct interpretation of Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, will show that said section enumerates two kinds of zero-rated customers, to wit: those who are engaged in business abroad and those who are not engaged in business abroad. Indeed, a plain reading of Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended by RA 9337, reveals that it contemplates two (2) situations wherein sales can be regarded as zero-rated for VAT purposes, viz. : 1) Services were rendered to a person engaged in business conducted outside the Philippines , and the consideration for which is paid for in foreign currency and accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP); or 2) Services were rendered to a non-resident person not engaged in business who is outside the Philippines when the services are performed , and the consideration for which is paid for in foreign currency and accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the BSP. True, in Burmeister case and in the latter case of Accenture, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , 29 the Supreme Court ruled that in order for the supply of services to be VAT zero-rated, the claimant must be able to establish, among others, that the recipient of such services is doing business outside the Philippines. The Court notes, however, that the provision that was interpreted by the Supreme Court in Burmeister is Section 102 (b) (2) of the NIRC 30 which, prior to its amendment by RA No. 9337 , provides as follows: "(b) Transaction subject to zero-rate. The following services performed in the Philippines by VAT-registered persons shall be subject to 0%: (1) Processing, manufacturing or repacking goods for other persons doing business outside the Philippines which goods are subsequently exported, where the services are paid for in acceptable foreign currency and accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP); (2) Services other than those mentioned in the preceding sub-paragraph , the consideration for which is paid for in acceptable foreign currency and accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP); (3) Services rendered to persons or entities whose exemptions under special laws or international agreements to which the Philippines is a signatory effectively subjects the supply of such services to zero rate; ICHDca (4) Services rendered to vessels, engaged exclusively in international shipping; and, (5) Services performed by subcontractors and/or contractors in processing, converting, or manufacturing goods for an enterprise whose export sales exceed seventy percent (70%) of total annual production." Notably, Section 102 (b) (2) of the NIRC, as then worded, did not contemplate the second situation stated in Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended by RA No. 9337, to wit, "services to a non-resident person not engaged in business who is outside the Philippines when the services are performed." In interpreting Section 102 (b) (2) of the NIRC, both in Burmeister and Accenture , the Supreme Court did not pass upon the issue of the applicability of the essential condition that the recipient of such services is doing business outside the Philippines to the second situation provided in Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended by RA No. 9337 . Needless to say, this is not an issue in both Burmeister and Accenture . Any interpretation extending the ruling of the Supreme Court in Burmeister and Accenture to the second situation provided in Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended by RA No. 9337, and consequently prescribing the essential condition that the recipient of services is doing business outside the Philippines clearly violate the well-settled rule in statutory construction as well as the maxim verba legis non est recedendum or "from the words of a statute there should be no departure." As clearly and succinctly worded, to qualify for zero-rating under the second situation, only the following requirements must be met: (a) services were rendered to a non-resident person; (b) said non-resident person is not engaged in business; (c) said non-resident person is outside the Philippines when services were performed; and, (d) the consideration for said services were paid for in foreign currency and accounted for under the rules and regulations of the BSP. In fine, the Court holds that the doctrine laid down in Burmeister and Accenture that in order for the supply of services to be VAT zero-rated, the claimant must be able to establish, among others, the existence of the essential condition that the recipient of such services is doing business outside the Philippines , applies only to the first situation provided in Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended by RA No. 9337 . In the second scenario, the taxpayer-claimant is not required to prove the fact that its customers are doing business outside the Philippines, but it is required to establish that its services were rendered to non-resident persons who are not engaged in business and who are outside the Philippines when the services were performed. In the case at bar, petitioner's VAT zero-rated sales still falls under the first scenario as petitioner's services were rendered to persons engaged in business outside the Philippines. On direct examination, petitioner's witness, Pacifico-Carreon, testified that petitioner's clients are engaged in core business functions and outsourced their respective finance, human resources, information technology, and procurement functions to petitioner. 31 Indubitably, as petitioner's clients are engaged in business outside the Philippines, petitioner must comply with Burmeister and Accenture wherein petitioner must establish that the recipient of such services is doing business outside the Philippines. To prove that petitioner's customers are located outside the Philippines, petitioner presented internal documents of Chevron, 32 on-line registries of companies from websites of foreign governments , 33 and negative certifications issued by the SEC . 34 As stated in Our Decision, "in order to be considered as non-resident foreign corporation engaged in business, each entity must be supported at the very least by both the SEC Certificate of Non-registration of Corporation/Partnership and Certificates/Articles of foreign incorporation/association or printed screenshots of the US SEC website showing the state/province/country where the entity was organized ." 35 (Emphasis supplied) TCAScE Being official government registry of corporations, the Court is inclined to accept the printed screenshots of the official websites of other foreign government's registry of companies as sufficient proof in lieu of the Certificates/Articles of Foreign Incorporation/Association. After a careful examination of the printouts of foreign registry submitted 36 by petitioner, the Court finds that the following clients of petitioner shall be considered as non-resident foreign corporations located outside the Philippines: SEC Certificates of Non-Registration Printout Foreign (Exhibit) Registry (Exhibit) Chevron Africa-Pakistan Services C-34 JJJ-13 Chevron Cambodia Limited C-40 JJJ-10 Chevron Global Downstream LLC C-77 JJJ-3 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. C-81 JJJ-6 Chevron Korea, Inc. C-110 JJJ-2 Chevron Kuo Pte. Ltd. C-51 JJJ-5 Chevron North Sea Limited C-23 JJJ-9 Chevron Reunion Limited C-92 JJJ-11 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. C-112 JJJ-7 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. C-104 JJJ-4 Chevron Uganda Ltd. C-63 JJJ-12 Accordingly, the sales of services by petitioner to said entities for the year 2009 in the amount of P178,801,182.83 should also be subjected to zero percent (0%) VAT, pursuant to Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended. The additional amount of P178,801,182.83 is broken down, as follows: OR No. OR Date Name of Affiliate Sales Sales Exhibit (in USD) (in Php) First Quarter of 2009 JANUARY 1195 19-Jan-09 Chevron Reunion Limited 662.66 P31,316.64 UU-6 1204 23-Jan-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 45,111.79 2,141,043.66 UU-15 1210 23-Jan-09 Chevron Kuo Pte. Ltd. 1,121.72 53,237.78 UU-21 1202 23-Jan-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 355,328.67 16,864,198.86 UU-13 1205 23-Jan-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 32,385.03 1,537,020.88 UU-16 1250 26-Jan-09 Chevron Korea, Inc. 66.71 3,152.65 UU-60 1223 27-Jan-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 301.58 14,259.10 UU-33 1220 27-Jan-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 1,076.00 50,874.70 UU-30 FEBRUARY 1262 11-Feb-09 Chevron Uganda Ltd. 1,128.86 P52,898.78 UU-71 1274 25-Feb-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 13,457.66 647,937.41 UU-82 1271 25-Feb-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 85,636.79 4,123,100.14 UU-79 1268 25-Feb-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 124,863.02 6,011,700.53 UU-76 1277 25-Feb-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 4,925.11 237,126.14 UU-85 MARCH 1296 04-Mar-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 312.38 P15,208.37 UU-104 1322 25-Mar-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 13,457.66 644,832.77 UU-129 1318 25-Mar-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 50,344.71 2,412,300.43 UU-125 1316 25-Mar-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 122,007.16 5,846,054.62 UU-123 1306 26-Mar-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 6,738.95 323,056.09 UU-113 Subtotal-(First Quarter) P41,009,319.55 Second Quarter of 2009 APRIL 1335 23-Apr-09 Chevron Reunion Limited 2,486.46 P120,176.90 UU-142 1342 24-Apr-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 5,492.53 266,757.16 UU-149 1339 24-Apr-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 244,586.41 11,878,893.15 UU-146 1341 24-Apr-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 107,257.89 5,209,222.44 UU-148 1385 27-Apr-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 717.66 34,770.35 UU-191 MAY 1410 26-May-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 13,614.54 P637,384.83 UU-214 1404 26-May-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 97,532.88 4,566,146.07 UU-208 1406 26-May-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 42,589.29 1,993,880.62 UU-210 1417 26-May-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 11.25 526.69 UU-221 1421 27-May-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 983.13 46,199.72 UU-225 JUNE 1455 25-Jun-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 13,614.54 P656,438.77 UU-258 1451 25-Jun-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 94,722.73 4,567,151.88 UU-254 1447 25-Jun-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 136,679.22 6,590,126.33 UU-250 1438 26-Jun-09 Chevron Africa-Pakistan Services 3,989.14 191,693.42 UU-241 Subtotal-(Second Quarter) P36,759,368.33 Third Quarter of 2009 JULY 1474 27-Jul-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 245,352.61 P11,773,157.87 UU-277 1490 27-Jul-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 1,658.56 79,585.41 UU-293 1469 28-Jul-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 15,487.72 742,816.31 UU-272 1470 28-Jul-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 983.13 47,152.52 UU-273 AUGUST 1525 25-Aug-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 13,614.54 P654,860.03 UU-328 1519 25-Aug-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 85,044.80 4,090,658.97 UU-322 1514 25-Aug-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 171,592.04 8,253,585.38 UU-317 SEPTEMBER 1559 25-Sep-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 13,614.54 P643,105.34 UU-362 1557 25-Sep-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 32,393.01 1,530,137.46 UU-360 1550 25-Sep-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 154,854.10 7,314,789.80 UU-353 1574 30-Sep-09 Chevron Africa-Pakistan Services 561,354.48 26,642,357.85 UU-377 Subtotal-(Third Quarter) P61,772,206.94 Fourth Quarter 2009 OCTOBER 1581 23-Oct-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 285,211.57 P13,259,487.22 UU-384 1602 26-Oct-09 Chevron Trading Pte. Ltd. 16,687.56 791,254.62 UU-405 1603 26-Oct-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 11,051.80 524,030.35 UU-406 1605 26-Oct-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 8,170.38 387,405.41 UU-408 1625 27-Oct-09 Chevron North Sea Limited 12,582.92 588,812.35 UU-424 1622 27-Oct-09 Chevron Africa-Pakistan Services 121,534.83 5,687,170.33 UU-421 NOVEMBER 1632 24-Nov-09 Chevron Africa-Pakistan Services 45,227.43 P2,116,398.22 UU-431 1637 25-Nov-09 Chevron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 147,500.94 6,911,946.58 UU-436 1643 25-Nov-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 3,196.65 149,796.16 UU-442 DECEMBER 1652 22-Dec-09 Chevron Cambodia Ltd. 3,792.37 P176,635.77 UU-451 1655 23-Dec-09 Chevron International Pte. Ltd. 186,434.72 8,667,351.00 UU-454 Subtotal-(Fourth Quarter) P39,260,288.01 Additional Valid Zero-Rated Sales for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters of 2009 P178,801,182.83 ============== Petitioner's VAT Zero-Rated Sales of Services to Cabinda Gulf Oil Company Limited Petitioner contends that the total amount of zero-rated sales credited to Cabinda Gulf Oil Company Limited ought to be P36,015,697.05 and not only P28,378,745.54. In Our Decision, sales of services by petitioner to various entities for the year 2009, which were subjected to zero percent (0%) VAT, pursuant to Section 108 (B) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, amounted to P409,127,980.26, which included the amount of P28,559,688.38 (not P28,378,745.54 37 as claimed by petitioner in its motion for partial reconsideration) representing petitioner's sales to Cabinda Gulf Oil Company Limited, as follows: Sales Sales Exhibit OR No. OR Date (in USD) (in Php) UU-14 January 1203 23-Jan-09 184,246.18 P8,744,479.35 UU-95 February 1287 26-Feb-09 3,565.71 171,263.69 UU-130 March 1323 25-Mar-09 4,900.93 234,831.34 UU-147 April 1340 24-Apr-09 242,805.14 11,792,381.74 UU-329 August 1526 25-Aug-09 3,877.06 186,486.77 UU-365 September 1562 25-Sep-09 3,830.56 180,942.84 UU-386 October 1583 23-Oct-09 155,932.50 7,249,302.65 Zero-rated sales to Cabinda Gulf Oil Co. Ltd. (per Decision) P28,559,688.38 ============ A careful examination of petitioner's supporting documents shows that sales of services to Cabinda Gulf Oil Co. Ltd for the year 2009 amounted to P36,196,639.90, computed as follows: Sales Sales Exhibit OR No. OR Date (in USD) (in Php) Zero-rated sales to Cabinda Gulf Oil Co. Ltd. (per Decision) P28,559,688.38 ADJUSTMENTS Second Quarter of 2009 UU-201 May 1397 25-May-09 1,073.57 P50,426.02 UU-236 June 1433 24-Jun-09 3,932.02 189,312.47 Subtotal P239,738.49 Third Quarter of 2009 UU-300 July 1497 24-Jul-09 154,527.78 P7,397,213.03 Subtotal P7,397,213.03 Additional Valid Zero-Rated Sales P7,636,951.52 Total zero-rated sales to Cabinda Gulf Oil Co. LTD. P36,196,639.90 ============ Therefore, the additional valid zero-rated sales for the year 2009 amounted to P186,438,134.34. 38 The Court cannot consider the rest of petitioner's declared zero-rated sales in the amount of P1,474,695,660.90 39 as zero-rated sales for petitioner's failure to prove that the entities to whom it rendered services are non-resident foreign corporations located outside the Philippines. cTDaEH Petitioner's adjusted valid VAT zero-rated sales for the four quarters of 2009 amount to P595,566,114.60. 40 In Our Decision, the amount of P24,420,542.94 input VAT was attributed to the entire zero-rated sales declared by petitioner in the amount of P2,070,261,775.50. For all the foregoing, the recomputed valid zero-rated sales of petitioner is P595,566,114.60, with an input VAT attributable thereto, amounting to P6,785,362.73, computed as follows: 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total Valid Zero-Rated Sales P213,467,038.52 P118,430,969.00 P150,286,053.41 P113,382,053.67 P595,566,114.60 Divide by Total Declared Zero-Rated Sales 620,201,395.33 508,595,820.63 469,176,463.98 472,288,095.56 2,070,261,775.50 Multiplied by Excess Input VAT 5,584,529.39 10,025,018.11 5,153,432.82 3,657,562.62 24,420,542.94 Excess Input VAT attributable to Valid Zero-Rated Sales P1,922,138.45 P2,334,412.83 P1,650,741.54 P878,069.90 P6,785,362.73 ============= ============= ============ ============ ============ Petitioner, therefore, has sufficiently proved its entitlement to a refund or issuance of a tax credit certificate in the amount of P6,785,362.73, 41 representing its unutilized excess input VAT attributable to its zero-rated sales for the four taxable quarters of 2009. WHEREFORE , premises considered, petitioner's " Motion for Partial Reconsideration " is hereby PARTIALLY GRANTED . Accordingly, the dispositive portion of Our Decision dated August 14, 2013 is hereby amended to read, as follows: "WHEREFORE , premises considered, the instant Petition for Review is hereby PARTIALLY GRANTED . Accordingly, respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue is hereby ORDERED to REFUND or to ISSUE A TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE in favor of petitioner Chevron Holdings, Inc. [formerly Caltex (Asia) Limited] in the reduced amount of SIX MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY FIVE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY TWO PESOS and 73/100 (P6,785,362.73) , representing petitioner's unutilized and excess input VAT attributable to its zero-rated sales of services to its affiliate companies for the four quarters of 2009. SO ORDERED." SO ORDERED. (SGD.) ROMAN G. DEL ROSARIO Presiding Justice Erlinda P. Uy and Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, JJ., concur. Footnotes 1. CTA Docket, Vol. III, p. 1716. 2. CTA Docket, Vol. III, p. 1737. 3. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 1743-1760. 4. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 1761-1794. 5. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 1795-2097. 6. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 2098-2148. 7. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 2149-2199. 8. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 2200-2212. 9. ICPA Report submitted on February 20, 2012. 10. ICPA Report submitted on February 20, 2012. 11. ICPA Report submitted on February 20, 2012. 12. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 1424-1711. 13. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 1712-1715. 14. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 1739-1738. 15. CTA Docket, Vol. III, p. 1718. 16. CTA Docket Vol. III, pp. 1719-1720. 17. Exhibits "HHH" to "HHH-31" and "LLL" to "LLL-12". 18. Exhibits "JJJ" to "JJJ-16". 19. Exhibits "C-116" to "C-133". 20. Exhibits "VV-1" to "VV-27". 21. Exhibits "RRR-1" to "RRR-3". 22. Exhibits "TTT" to "TTT-3". 23. Exhibits "WWW" to "WWW-1". 24. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 2221-2222. 25. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 2223-2231. 26. CTA Docket, Vol. III, pp. 2240-2244. 27. CTA Docket, Vol. III, unpaginated . 28. G.R. No. 153205, January 22, 2007. 29. G.R. No. 190102, July 11, 2012. 30. The applicable provision in 1986 when Burmeister rendered the services and paid the VAT in question was the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1977 as amended by Executive Order No. 273 and Republic Act No. 7716 dated 25 July 1987 and 5 May 1994, respectively. Section 102 (b) was renumbered as Section 108 (B). The renumbering took effect on January 1, 1998 pursuant to Republic Act No. 8424, otherwise known as the Tax Reform Act of 1997. On November 1, 2005, Section 6 of RA No. 9337 amended Section 108 (B). 31. CTA Docket, p. 1719. 32. Exhibits "HHH" to "HHH-31". 33. Exhibits "JJJ" to "JJJ-16". 34. Exhibits "C" to "C-133". 35. CTA Docket Vol. 1, pp. 478-479. 36. Exhibits "JJJ" to "JJJ-16", Docket, pp. 2098-2148. 37. Under by P180,942.84 (exact amount of transaction made in September, Exhibit "UU-365"). 38. P36,196,639.89 less P28,559,688.38 plus P178,801,182.83. 39. P2,070,261,775.50 less P409,127,980.26 less P186,438,134.34. 40. P409,127,980.26 plus P7,636,951.51 plus P178,801,182.83. 41. The amount of P4,623,001.60 granted in the Decision dated August 14, 2013 is already included in the total amount of P6,785,362.73.