Toledo Power Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

SECOND DIVISION [C.T.A. CASE NO. 8792. June 6, 2017.] TOLEDO POWER COMPANY , petitioner , vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , respondent . DECISION CASTAEDA, JR. , J p : STATEMENT OF THE CASE This case involves a claim for refund in the amount of P60,067,141.05 filed by Toledo Power Company, allegedly representing its unutilized input value-added tax (VAT) related to its zero-rated sales for the four quarters of taxable year 2012. HTcADC STATEMENT OF FACTS Petitioner Toledo Power Company is a partnership duly registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), with Company Registration No. APO94-900. 1 Under its Restated and Amended Agreement of General Partnership, petitioner is engaged in the business of acquiring, owning, rehabilitating, maintaining and operating the Sangi coal-fired and oil-fired electrical generation facility located in Sangi, Toledo City, Cebu and the Carmen diesel-fueled electric generation facility located in Barangay Don Andres Soriano, Toledo City, Cebu. 2 As a generation company, petitioner was granted by the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) with the authority to operate its generation facilities. 3 It is likewise registered with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) as a VAT taxpayer with Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) 003-883-626-000 per BIR Certificate of Registration No. 2RC0000074406. 4 On the other hand, respondent is the duly appointed Commissioner of the BIR who has the power to decide disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties imposed in relation thereto or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) or other laws or portions thereof administered by the BIR. He holds office at 5th Floor, BIR National Office Building, Agham Road, Diliman, Quezon City. On November 29, 2013, petitioner filed with the BIR Revenue District Office No. 123 an administrative claim for refund in the total amount of P60,067,141.05, allegedly representing its unutilized input VAT related to its zero-rated sales/receipts for the 1st to 4th quarters of taxable year 2012. 5 CAIHTE In view of respondent's inaction on its protest, petitioner filed the instant Petition for Review before this Court on March 31, 2014. Respondent filed his Answer 6 on May 28, 2014 and interposed special and affirmative defenses, alleging, among others, that petitioner must prove its compliance with the prescribed checklist of requirements provided under Revenue Memorandum Order No. 53-98; that petitioner failed to prove that it has submitted the complete documents to substantiate its administrative claim for refund, hence, the instant petition was prematurely filed with the Court; that petitioner's alleged claim for refund is subject to administrative routinary investigation/examination by the BIR; that the instant petition should not be given due course for lack of jurisdiction since petitioner failed to exhaust all administrative remedies before elevating this case to this Court; and that the burden of proof is on the taxpayer to establish its right to refund, and failure to sustain the burden is fatal to the claim for refund. A Notice of Pre-Trial Conference was issued by the Court on May 29, 2014, setting the case for pre-trial conference on July 3, 2014, 7 but was reset to July 31, 2014, 8 upon respondent's motion, 9 and later reset to August 28, 2014. 10 Accordingly, petitioner's Pre-Trial Brief 11 was filed on June 25, 2014; while respondent's Pre-Trial Brief 12 was filed on July 21, 2014. Pre-trial conference ensued. Meanwhile, upon petitioner's motion, 13 this Court commissioned Mr. Joseph Cedric V. Calica of AMC & Associates, as Independent Certified Public Accountant (ICPA) for the case. 14 The parties submitted their Joint Stipulation of Facts and Issues 15 on September 17, 2014. Subsequently, the Court issued a Pre-Trial Order 16 on September 24, 2014, approving and adopting the parties' joint stipulations and the pre-trial was deemed terminated. During trial, petitioner presented (1) Ms. Edita C. Encarnacion, 17 petitioner's Assistant Vice President Accounting; (2) Mr. Rolando L. Vicente, 18 Finance Manager of Cebu Electric Cooperative, Inc. III, purchaser of electric power sourced from petitioner; (3) Mr. Joseph Cedric V. Calica, 19 the ICPA; (4) Isidito Camota Decina, 20 Head of the Dispatch Group of petitioner; and (5) Bernadette Ann V. Policarpio, 21 legal counsel of Global Business Power Corporation, petitioner's ultimate parent company, as its witnesses. Petitioner filed its Formal Offer of Evidence 22 on September 3, 2015 and Supplemental Formal Offer of Evidence 23 on February 9, 2016. In the Resolution 24 dated March 29, 2016, the Court admitted all of petitioner's evidence. On the other hand, respondent manifested that he has no witness to present. 25 The case was submitted for decision on June 29, 2016 26 considering petitioner's Memorandum 27 filed on June 24, 2016 and respondent's Manifestation 28 filed on June 23, 2016, stating that he is adopting his Answer as his memorandum. aScITE STATEMENT OF ISSUES The parties agreed on the following issues for the Court's resolution: 29 Joint Issue: Whether petitioner is entitled to a claim for refund in the total amount of P60,067,141.05, representing unutilized VAT input taxes for the 1st to 4th quarters of the taxable year 2012. Additional Issues for Petitioner: A. Whether petitioner is a VAT-registered taxpayer. B. Whether petitioner is engaged in zero-rated sales. C. Whether the input taxes are due or paid and have not been applied against output taxes during the quarter and in the succeeding quarters. D. Whether the input tax being claimed is attributable to zero-rated sales. E. Whether the instant claim complies with the period for claiming a refund under Section 112 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, as amended. DISCUSSION/RULING Petitioner anchors its claim for refund/tax credit of its unutilized input VAT attributable to its zero-rated sales/receipts on Section 112, in relation to Section 108 (B) (3), of the NIRC of 1997, as amended. Section 112 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, allows the refund or tax credit of unutilized excess input VAT attributable to zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales. Subsections (A) and (C) thereof provide that: SEC. 112. Refunds or Tax Credits of Input Tax . (A) Zero-Rated or Effectively Zero-Rated Sales . Any VAT-registered person, whose sales are zero-rated or effectively zero-rated may, within two (2) years after the close of the taxable quarter when the sales were made, apply for the issuance of a tax credit certificate or refund of creditable input tax due or paid attributable to such sales, except transitional input tax, to the extent that such input tax has not been applied against output tax: Provided, however, That in the case of zero-rated sales under Section 106(A)(2)(a)(1), (2) and (b) and Section 108(B)(1) and (2), the acceptable foreign currency exchange proceeds thereof had been duly accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP): Provided, further, That where the taxpayer is engaged in zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sale and also in taxable or exempt sale of goods or properties or services, and the amount of creditable input tax due or paid cannot be directly and entirely attributed to any one of the transactions, it shall be allocated proportionately on the basis of the volume of sales: Provided, finally , That for a person making sales that are zero-rated under Section 108(B)(6), the input taxes shall be allocated ratably between his zero-rated and non-zero-rated sales. DETACa xxx xxx xxx (C) Period within which Refund or Tax Credit of Input Taxes shall be Made . In proper cases, the Commissioner shall grant a refund or issue the tax credit certificate for creditable input taxes within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of submission of complete documents in support of the application filed in accordance with Subsection (A) hereof. In case of full or partial denial of the claim for tax refund or tax credit, or the failure on the part of the Commissioner to act on the application within the period prescribed above, the taxpayer affected may, within thirty (30) days from the receipt of the decision denying the claim or after the expiration of the one hundred twenty day-period, appeal the decision or the unacted claim with the Court of Tax Appeals. Pursuant to the above-quoted provisions, in order to be entitled to a refund/tax credit of excess input VAT attributable to zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales, the following requisites must be complied with: 1. the taxpayer-claimant must be VAT-registered; 2. there must be zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales; 3. input taxes were incurred or paid; 4. such input taxes are attributable to zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales; 5. said input taxes were not applied against any output VAT liability; and 6. the claim was filed within the prescriptive period. The Court shall first determine whether petitioner complied with the sixth requisite. Petitioner's administrative and judicial claims were timely filed Pursuant to the above-quoted Section 112 (A), the application for tax credit certificate/refund of input VAT must be filed within two years after the close of the taxable quarter when the zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales were made. Thus, petitioner's last day for filing of its administrative claim for the four taxable quarters of calendar year (CY) 2012 fell on the following dates: HEITAD Period Covered Last Day for Filing Administrative Claim January 1 to March 31, 2012 (1st Quarter) March 31, 2014 April 1 to June 30, 2012 (2nd Quarter) June 30, 2014 July 1 to Sept. 30, 2012 (3rd Quarter) September 30, 2014 October 1 to Dec. 31, 2012 (4th Quarter) December 31, 2014 Evidently, petitioner timely filed with the BIR Large Taxpayers Division-Cebu, Revenue District Office No. 123 its administrative claim, together with the supporting documents, on November 29, 2013. 30 As to the timeliness of petitioner's judicial appeal, Section 112 (C) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, states the time requirements for filing a judicial claim for the refund or tax credit of input VAT. The legal provision speaks of two periods: the period of 120 days, which serves as a waiting period to give time for the CIR to act on the administrative claim for a refund or credit; and the period of 30 days, which refers to the period for filing a judicial claim with the CTA. 31 Applying Section 112 (C), respondent should have acted on petitioner's claim for tax credit certificate/refund until March 29, 2014, the end of the 120-day period reckoned from November 29, 2013, the date when petitioner is deemed to have made its submission of complete documents to support its application for refund of excess unutilized input VAT. From March 29, 2014, petitioner had 30 days, or until April 28, 2014, within which to file its judicial claim before the Court. Therefore, the instant Petition for Review was timely filed on March 31, 2014. Petitioner is VAT-registered and had zero-rated sales/receipts for the four taxable quarters of CY 2012 Petitioner complied with the first requisite considering that it is a VAT-registered entity with Certificate of Registration No. 2RC0000074406 duly issued by respondent and was assigned with TIN 003-883-626-000. 32 On the second requisite, records show that petitioner is a partnership duly registered with the SEC and is engaged in the business of acquiring, owning, rehabilitating and operating coal-fired and oil-fired electrical generation facilities. 33 As a generation company, petitioner was granted by the ERC with the authority to operate generation facilities located in Sangi and Sigpit, Toledo City, Cebu under Certificate of Compliance No. 09-11-GXT 61-0066 issued on November 16, 2009. 34 Petitioner avers that it is engaged in zero-rated sales as it sells and supplies electric power to entities located in economic zones, such as Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) or to Board of Investments (BOI)-registered enterprises and to other entities whose purchases from local suppliers are entitled to VAT zero-rating. aDSIHc Indeed, sales of services by a VAT-registered taxpayer, such as herein petitioner, to PEZA-registered entities or BOI-registered 100% exporters are subject to zero percent (0%) VAT. Pertinent provisions of Section 108 (B) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, state that: SEC. 108. Value-Added Tax on Sale of Services and Use or Lease of Properties . 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 (3) Services rendered to persons or entities whose exemption under special laws or international agreements to which the Philippines is a signatory effectively subjects the supply of such services to zero percent (0%) rate ; (Emphasis supplied) The special law specific to this case is Republic Act (RA) No. 7916, as amended, otherwise known as "The Special Economic Zone Act of 1995". Section 8 of RA No. 7916, as amended, mandates that the PEZA shall manage and operate the ecozones as a separate customs territory, thus: SECTION 8. ECOZONE to be Operated and Managed as Separate Customs Territory. The ECOZONES shall be managed and operated by the PEZA as separate customs territory. The PEZA is hereby vested with the authority to issue certificates of origin for products manufactured or processed in each ECOZONE in accordance with the prevailing rules of origin, and the pertinent regulations of the Department of Trade and Industry and/or the Department of Finance. Since the Ecozone is viewed as a foreign territory by legal fiction, sales of goods and services made by a VAT-registered person in the Philippine customs territory to an entity registered and operating within the Ecozone are considered exports to a foreign country subject to zero percent (0%) VAT. This was elucidated by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Toshiba Information Equipment (Phils.), Inc., 35 to wit: This Court agrees, however, that PEZA-registered enterprises, which would necessarily be located within ECOZONES, are VAT-exempt entities , not because of Section 24 of Rep. Act No. 7916, as amended, which imposes the five percent (5%) preferential tax rate on gross income of PEZA-registered enterprises, in lieu of all taxes; but, rather, because of Section 8 of the same statute which establishes the fiction that ECOZONES are foreign territory. xxx An ECOZONE or a Special Economic Zone has been described as ATICcS . . . [S]elected areas with highly developed or which have the potential to be developed into agro-industrial, industrial, tourist, recreational, commercial, banking, investment and financial centers whose metes and bounds are fixed or delimited by Presidential Proclamations. An ECOZONE may contain any or all of the following: industrial estates (IEs), export processing zones (EPZs), free trade zones and tourist/recreational centers. The national territory of the Philippines outside of the proclaimed borders of the ECOZONE shall be referred to as the Customs Territory. Section 8 of Rep. Act No. 7916, as amended, mandates that the PEZA shall manage and operate the ECOZONES as a separate customs territory; thus, creating the fiction that the ECOZONE is a foreign territory. As a result, sales made by a supplier in the Customs Territory to a purchaser in the ECOZONE shall be treated as an exportation from the Customs Territory. Conversely, sales made by a supplier from the ECOZONE to a purchaser in the Customs Territory shall be considered as an importation into the Customs Territory. Given the preceding discussion, what would be the VAT implication of sales made by a supplier from the Customs Territory to an ECOZONE enterprise? The Philippine VAT system adheres to the Cross Border Doctrine, according to which, no VAT shall be imposed to form part of the cost of goods destined for consumption outside of the territorial border of the taxing authority. Hence, actual export of goods and services from the Philippines to a foreign country must be free of VAT; while, those destined for use or consumption within the Philippines shall be imposed with ten percent (10%) 36 VAT. (Emphasis supplied) With respect to sales by a VAT-registered supplier to a BOI-registered manufacturer/producer, Section 4.106-5 of Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 16-05, as amended by RR No. 04-07, provides: SECTION 4.106-5. Zero-Rated Sales of Goods or Properties . xxx The following sales by VAT-registered persons shall be subject to zero percent (0%) rate: (a) Export Sales . "Export Sales" shall mean: xxx xxx xxx (5) Transactions considered export sales under Executive Order No. 226, otherwise known as the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987, and other special laws. ETHIDa "Considered export sales under Executive Order No. 226" shall mean the Philippine port F.O.B. value determined from invoices, bills of lading, inward letters of credit, landing certificates, and other commercial documents, of export products exported directly by a registered export producer, or the net selling price of export products sold by a registered export producer to another export producer, or to an export trader that subsequently exports the same; Provided, That sales of export products to another producer or to an export trader shall only be deemed export sales when actually exported by the latter, as evidenced by landing certificates or similar commercial documents; Provided , further, That pursuant to EO 226 and other special laws, even without actual exportation, the following shall be considered constructively exported: (1) sales to bonded manufacturing warehouses of export-oriented manufacturers; (2) sales to export processing zones pursuant to Republic Act (RA) Nos. 7916, as amended, 7903, 7922 and other similar export processing zones; (3) sale to enterprises duly registered and accredited with the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority pursuant to RA 7227; (4) sales to registered export traders operating bonded trading warehouses supplying raw materials in the manufacture of export products under guidelines to be set by the Board in consultation with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Customs (BOC); (5) sales to diplomatic missions and other agencies and/or instrumentalities granted tax immunities, of locally manufactured, assembled or repacked products whether paid for in foreign currency or not. For purposes of zero-rating, the export sales of registered export traders shall include commission income. The exportation of goods on consignment shall not be deemed export sales until the export products consigned are in fact sold by the consignee; and Provided, finally, that sales of goods, properties or services made by a VAT-registered supplier to a BOI-registered manufacturer/producer whose products are 100% exported are considered export sales. A certification to this effect must be issued by the Board of Investment (BOI) which shall be good for one year unless subsequently re-issued by the BOI. (Emphasis supplied) Clearly, sales of services by a VAT-registered taxpayer, such as herein petitioner, to entities located in Ecozones and to BOI-registered manufacturers/producers whose products are 100% exported are considered "export sales" subject to zero percent (0%) VAT rate pursuant to Section 108 (B) (3) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, and Section 4.106-5 of RR No. 16-05. In its Quarterly VAT Returns for the four taxable quarters of CY 2012, petitioner reflected an amount of P1,781,612,046.76 zero-rated sales/receipts, broken down as follows: Exhibit CY 2012 Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts "P-17" 1st Quarter P542,930,177.94 "P-18" 2nd Quarter 501,923,964.17 "P-21" 3rd Quarter 430,079,791.55 "P-24" 4th Quarter 306,678,113.10 Total P1,781,612,046.76 A perusal of petitioner's Schedule of Gross Sales (VATable, Zero-Rated, VAT-exempt and Sales to Government) 37 with the related sales invoices, official receipts and credit/debit memos 38 shows that the amount of P1,781,612,046.76 treated by petitioner as zero-rated sales/receipts pertains to its sales of electricity to Balamban Enerzone Corporation (BEC), Carmen Copper Corporation (CCC), 39 and Cebu Electric Cooperative III (CEBECO III). TIADCc It was established that BEC is a PEZA-registered entity and CCC is a registered BOI 100% exporter as evidenced by the Certifications issued by the PEZA 40 and BOI, 41 respectively. Thus, petitioner's sales of electricity to BEC and CCC for the four taxable quarters of CY 2012 qualify for VAT zero-rating except for the following sales for the first and fourth quarters in the respective amounts of P167,364,545.29 and P115,377,193.94 which are not covered by VAT zero-rated official receipts (ORs) in accordance with Section 113 (A) (2) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended: Exhibit OR No. Customer 1st Quarter 4th Quarter - - BALAMBAN ENERZONE CORPORATION P8,647,861.37 - 2323 CARMEN COPPER CORPORATION 8,094,882.48 - 2323 CARMEN COPPER CORPORATION 150,621,801.44 - 2349 BALAMBAN ENERZONE CORPORATION P7,893,254.29 - - BALAMBAN ENERZONE CORPORATION 8,959,772.99 - 2356 BALAMBAN ENERZONE CORPORATION 10,813,211.00 - 2357 CARMEN COPPER CORPORATION 992,722.36 - 2358 CARMEN COPPER CORPORATION 75,905,022.30 - 2356 BALAMBAN ENERZONE CORPORATION 10,813,211.00 Total P167,364,545.29 P115,377,193.94 With regard to petitioner's sales to CEBECO III, petitioner asserts that since the electricity it sold to CEBECO III was ultimately distributed to BEC and CCC, petitioner's energy fee billings to CEBECO III were pass through charges and directly attributable to BEC and CCC. Petitioner posits that its sales to CEBECO III are likewise considered as zero-rated sales, citing as basis therefor Revenue Memorandum Circular (RMC) No. 61-05 dated October 27, 2005. cSEDTC The Court disagrees with petitioner. The VAT zero-rating contemplated under Section 108 (B) (3) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended (in relation to Section 8 of RA No. 7916, as amended) and Section 4.106-5 of RR No. 16-05, as amended pertains only to sales made directly to PEZA-registered entities and BOI-registered 100% exporters. Since CEBECO III is neither a PEZA-registered entity nor a BOI-registered 100% exporter, the following sales to CEBECO III do not qualify for VAT zero-rating: Exhibit OR No. 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter P-105-138 2717 P8,366,451.93 P-105-139 2718 6,924,583.91 P-105-152 2732 6,576,566.19 P-105-153 2733 8,818,614.94 P-105-173 2744 7,470,878.44 P-105-173 2744 6,106,423.96 P-105-191 2753 P6,752,768.35 P-105-192 2754 5,545,934.36 P-105-213 2771 7,829,375.98 P-105-213 2771 5,982,481.37 P-105-356 2786 9,506,165.89 P-105-255 2797 P454,092.05 P-105-256 2798 5,856,012.52 P-105-256 2798 3,438,606.48 P-105-272 2868 6,018,956.23 P-105-273 2869 4,102,823.97 P-105-306 2879 2,171,417.99 P-105-306 2879 56,268.11 P-105-306 2879 7,392,333.52 P-105-325 2896 P7,490,193.92 P-105-325 2896 3,228,804.45 P-105-344 2900 9,525,723.51 - 2924 8,547,142.00 Total P44,263,519.37 P35,616,725.95 P29,490,510.87 P28,791,863.88 Therefore, only sales/receipts amounting to P1,360,707,687.46, as computed below, qualify for VAT zero-rating: 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total Total Declared Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts Per Return P542,930,177.94 P501,923,964.17 P430,079,791.55 P306,678,113.10 P1,781,612,046.76 Less: Disallowances Sales not supported by official receipts 167,364,545.29 - - 115,377,193.94 282,741,739.23 Sales to CEBECO III 44,263,519.37 35,616,725.95 29,490,510.87 28,791,863.88 138,162,620.07 Total Allowed Zero-Rated Sales P331,302,113.28 P466,307,238.22 P400,589,280.68 P162,509,055.28 P1,360,707,687.46 Petitioner incurred/paid excess input taxes attributable to its valid zero-rated sales/receipts for the subject periods and said input taxes were not applied against any output VAT liability After resolving that petitioner had VAT zero-rated sales/receipts for the four taxable quarters of CY 2012, the Court shall now determine the amount of unutilized excess input VAT attributable thereto. AIDSTE In its 2012 Quarterly VAT Returns, petitioner reported the following input taxes totaling P148,611,453.13 arising from its amortization of input VAT on purchases of capital goods exceeding P1Million, purchases of capital goods not exceeding P1Million, domestic purchases and importation of goods other than capital goods and domestic purchases of services, broken down as follows: 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter CY 2012 (Exhibit "P-17") (Exhibit "P-18") (Exhibit "P-21") (Exhibit "P-24") Input Tax Deferred on Capital Goods exceeding P1Million from previous quarter P1,970,077.71 P2,000,868.29 P1,805,870.12 P1,918,040.17 P1,970,077.71 Add: Input Tax on Capital Goods exceeding P1Million purchased this quarter 219,516.85 296,407.56 943,516.83 1,459,441.24 Total Unamortized Input Tax on Capital Goods exceeding P1Million P2,189,594.56 P2,000,868.29 P2,102,277.68 P2,861,557.00 P3,429,518.95 Less: Input Tax on Purchases of Capital Goods exceeding P1Million deferred for the succeeding period 2,000,868.29 1,805,870.12 1,918,040.17 2,649,506.67 2,649,506.67 Amortization of Input Tax on Purchases of Capital Goods exceeding P1Million P188,726.27 P194,998.17 P184,237.51 P212,050.33 P780,012.28 Add: Input Tax on Current Purchases Purchases of capital goods not exceeding P1Million 94,088.66 70,081.71 - 164,170.37 Domestic purchases of goods other than capital goods 2,339,408.36 4,757,874.47 7,658,181.33 17,191,706.76 31,947,170.92 Importation of goods other than capital goods 25,882,597.00 2,409,980.00 2,782,002.00 26,786,411.00 57,860,990.00 Domestic purchases of services 6,543,893.02 15,030,906.91 15,657,404.00 20,626,905.63 57,859,109.56 Total P34,954,624.65 P22,487,848.21 P26,351,906.55 P64,817,073.72 P148,611,453.13 In support of the said input VAT, petitioner presented among others, its Schedule of Domestic Purchases of Goods and Services and Corresponding Input Tax, 42 Schedule of Importation of Goods and Corresponding Input Tax 43 and the related suppliers' official receipts and sales invoices, Bureau of Customs (BOC) Import Entry and Internal Revenue Declarations (IEIRDs), Statements of Settlement of Duties and Taxes (SSDTs) and Temporary Assessment Notices 44 which were all examined by the Court-commissioned ICPA, Mr. Joseph Cedric V. Calica. SDAaTC Based on the ICPA's findings, petitioner's reported input VAT in the aggregate amount of P17,361,231.47 shall be disallowed for not being properly substantiated by VAT invoices or receipts as prescribed under Sections 110 (A), 113 (A) and (B), 237, and 238 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, and as implemented by Sections 4.110-1, 4.110-2, 4.110-8, and 4.113-1 of RR No. 16-05, as amended: Exhibit Exceptions 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter CY 2012 P-106-1 No sales invoices/official receipts submitted by the petitioner P504,527.89 P42,618.20 P1,439,832.31 P4,458,124.37 P6,445,102.77 P-106-2 Supporting documents are not in the period covered by the claim 2,319,037.59 62,574.97 705,319.74 219,373.66 3,306,305.96 P-106-3 No valid supporting documents - 10,827.86 852,707.50 6,318,626.46 7,182,161.82 P-106-4 Vat amount per schedule does not tally with the amount indicated in the supporting document 11,965.38 - - - 11,965.38 P-106-5 Incorrect/incomplete name of the petitioner 2,823.60 - 181,956.85 139.29 184,919.74 P-106-6 No TIN of the supplier - 12,429.60 - - 12,429.60 P-106-7 No TIN of the petitioner - 51,448.02 4,687.79 3,892.50 60,028.31 P-106-8 Incorrect or no address of the Company - 19,294.80 - - 19,294.80 P-106-9 VAT not separately shown in the documents 2,057.14 4,578.46 6,319.15 126,068.34 139,023.09 Total P2,840,411.60 P203,771.91 P3,190,823.34 P11,126,224.62 P17,361,231.47 In addition, the Court finds that the following input VAT should likewise be disallowed for failure to meet the substantiation requirements prescribed under the aforementioned VAT law and regulations, detailed as follows: Exhibit Invoice/OR No. Supplier Input VAT Claim (In Php) 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1. Domestic purchases of goods and services Input VAT supported by ORs pre-printed/stamped with "NOT A VALID SOURCE OF INPUT TAX" P-102-75 130 MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 246,016.60 P-102-1720 16723-A AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 331.71 P-102-123 0128A MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 248,401.96 P-102-1728 16848 ELASCO INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 5,400.00 P-102-178 108 MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 178,539.69 P-102-179 113 MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 252,187.44 P-102-180 116 A MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 257,260.20 P-102-2153 50624 MICROGENESIS BUSINESS SYSTEMS 1,157.14 P-102-2171 138-A MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 249,863.49 P-102-353 152 MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 249,292.50 P-102-2222 3764 ULTRACOTE PAINTS & COATINGS CORPORATION 9,647.18 P-102-2298 148 MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 257,467.05 P-102-451 144 MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 251,161.27 P-102-727 694 THE FLOWER PLANT BY WTU 267.86 P-102-836 4075 ULTRACOTE PAINTS & COATINGS CORPORATION 24,102.82 P-102-2083 4509 ULTRACOTE PAINTS & COATINGS CORPORATION 33,756.05 P-102-1545 162-A MAJESTIC SHIPPING CORPORATION 248,788.04 Subtotal 1,188,137.60 1,018,588.63 24,370.68 282,544.09 Input VAT supported by TIN-V invoices/ORs P-102-85 01659 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 2,395.78 P-102-85 01659 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 1,025.47 P-102-86 01663 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 788.78 P-102-86 01663 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 2,113.87 P-102-86 01663 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 350.42 P-102-87 01661 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 382.73 P-102-87 01661 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 756.00 P-102-87 01661 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 93.98 P-102-87 01661 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 382.72 P-102-88 01668 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 4,823.12 P-102-89 01669 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 6,545.09 P-102-90 01670 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 13,658.96 P-102-91 01662 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 382.72 P-102-91 01662 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 23.21 P-102-92 01667 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 180.00 P-102-149 01657 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 334.88 P-102-149 01657 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 146.88 P-102-149 01657 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 671.43 P-102-149 01657 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 1,665.26 P-102-149 01657 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 88.04 P-102-149 01657 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 348.00 P-102-150 01656 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 1,048.60 P-102-150 01656 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 108.05 P-102-150 01656 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 2,623.78 P-102-151 01655 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 819.29 P-102-151 01655 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 2,235.12 P-102-151 01655 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 673.60 P-102-1732 1644 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 876.73 P-102-210 01650 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 498.47 P-102-210 01650 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 71.34 P-102-210 01650 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 120.00 P-102-2151 4600 LIANG CHI INDUSTRY PHILS. 11,606.40 P-102-528 0333 MARNO TRADING 21,379.29 P-102-529 P-102-549 0311 MARNO TRADING 565.44 P-102-552 0315 MARNO TRADING 3,553.20 P-102-1932 0318 MARNO TRADING 278.79 P-102-553 0317 MARNO TRADING 239.14 P-102-1933 0316 MARNO TRADING 535.71 P-102-1934 321 MARNO TRADING 218.57 P-102-1935 0319 MARNO TRADING 535.71 P-102-554 0312 MARNO TRADING 4,140.00 P-102-583 0325 MARNO TRADING 1,020.00 P-102-584 0326 MARNO TRADING 1,205.28 P-102-588 0327 MARNO TRADING 2,860.71 P-102-589 0324 MARNO TRADING 5,245.71 P-102-737 01693 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 448.71 P-102-737 01693 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 459.78 P-102-737 01693 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 374.24 P-102-737 01693 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 596.90 P-102-2020 0309 MARNO TRADING 257.14 P-102-2020 0309 MARNO TRADING 257.14 P-102-907 01687 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 384.07 P-102-908 01686 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 528.62 P-102-908 01686 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 516.00 P-102-908 01686 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 88.04 P-102-910 1685 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 390.25 P-102-910 1685 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 364.28 P-102-910 1685 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 61.67 P-102-1143 371 MARNO TRADING 2,008.93 P-102-2119 338 MARNO TRADING 16,714.29 P-102-1253 347 MARNO TRADING 2,149.66 P-102-1254 355 MARNO TRADING 120.64 P-102-1302 0335 MARNO TRADING 929.40 P-102-1605 1701 ALAS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE 495.99 P-102-1347 389 MARNO TRADING 1,680.00 Subtotal 46,232.32 11,606.40 46,504.39 24,098.91 Input VAT supported by invoices/ORs dated outside the period of claim P-102-1718 9107 SEVERO SY LING, INC. 11,283.08 P-102-1719 9342 SEVERO SY LING, INC. 7,839.53 P-102-65 03-01805 AMERICAN PACKING INDUSTRIES (PHILS.) 10,980.00 P-102-1722 2901 KINGMARK ENT. PHIL. 28,392.86 P-102-1723 2907 KINGMARK ENT. PHIL. 70,982.14 P-102-1724 1822 RBER INDUSTRIAL & TRADING CORPORATION 22,701.85 Subtotal 152,179.46 - - - Input VAT supported only by a Provisional Receipt P-102-93 3670 AMC & ASSOCIATES, CPA 20,160.00 Subtotal 20,160.00 - - - Input VAT supported by TIN-Non VAT invoices/ORs P-102-1817 500 PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCERS, ASSOCIATION, INC. 11,396.88 P-102-508 1732 KJL COMPUTER ENTERPRISE 75.00 P-102-1190 45905 ISA-CON ENTERPRISES 257.14 P-102-1645 N32-0000542 NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES 497.61 P-102-1715 444 NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES 366.14 P-102-1650 N32-0000404 NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES 23.11 P-102-1651 N32-0000343 NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES 3,395.84 Subtotal - 11,396.88 75.00 4,539.84 Input VAT amount not separately indicated in the invoices/ORs P-102-723 9401 PRODUCT EQUIPMENT RESOURCES & TRADING, INC. (42.22) P-102-723 9401 PRODUCT EQUIPMENT RESOURCES & TRADING, INC. 8,023.90 P-102-789 9312 PRODUCT EQUIPMENT RESOURCES & TRADING, INC. (42.21) P-102-789 9312 PRODUCT EQUIPMENT RESOURCES & TRADING, INC. 8,304.63 Subtotal - - 16,244.10 - Input VAT not covered by the supporting OR P-102-2302 6023 SCB FAO PEMC 3,829,981.06 P-102-2302 6023 SCB FAO PEMC (1,840,974.54) P-102-2302 6023 SCB FAO PEMC (1,462,351.40) P-102-2302 6023 SCB FAO PEMC 307.49 P-102-2302 6023 SCB FAO PEMC 1,852.88 P-102-2318 5805 SCB FAO PEMC 980,731.57 P-102-2318 5805 SCB FAO PEMC (161,309.85) P-102-2318 5805 SCB FAO PEMC 307.49 P-102-2318 5805 SCB FAO PEMC 1,852.88 P-102-628 6954 SCB FAD PEMC 28,144.07 P-102-628 6954 SCB FAO PEMC 7,837.05 P-102-628 6954 SCB FAO PEMC 713.52 P-102-628 6954 SCB FAO PEMC 231.79 P-102-628 6954 SCB FAO PEMC 959.14 P-102-703 2238873 GLOBE TELECOM, INC. 107.14 P-102-725 6723 SCB FAO PEMC 1,481.76 P-102-1922 6723 SCB FAO PEMC 307.49 P-102-775 879 JMPM FREIGHT FORWARDER INTERNATIONAL, INC. 2,510.84 P-102-775 879 JMPM FREIGHT FORWARDER INTERNATIONAL, INC. 166.80 P-102-775 879 JMPM FREIGHT FORWARDER INTERNATIONAL, INC. 166.80 P-102-775 879 JMPM FREIGHT FORWARDER INTERNATIONAL, INC. 186.97 P-102-2074 08248 PHILIPPINE ELECTRICITY MARKET CORPORATION 664.17 P-102-2074 08248 PHILIPPINE ELECTRICITY MARKET CORPORATION 6,156.55 Subtotal - 1,350,397.58 42,813.37 6,820.72 Exhibit reference does not pertain to the input VAT claim P-102-632 6954 SCB FAO PEMC 494,140.86 P-102-632 6954 SCB FAO PEMC (169,942.99) P-102-632 6954 SCB FAO PEMC 79.49 P-102-2101 7426 PHILIPPINE ELECTRICITY MARKET CORPORATION 664.17 P-102-1215 650212 PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION 58,251.84 P-102-2143 504 SAN-VIC AGRO-BUILDERS 89,472.00 Subtotal - - 324,277.36 148,388.01 Input VAT claimed twice P-102-2021 6633 MARNIEL MARKETING 1,350.00 669350 PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORP. 58,448.26 669349 PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORP. 58,448.26 Subtotal - - 1,350.00 116,896.52 Marked exhibit cannot be found from the records P-102-1631 22580 MANDAUE INTEGRATED MANPOWER SERVICES 3,378.96 P-102-1631 22580 MANDAUE INTEGRATED MANPOWER SERVICES 1,016.52 P-102-1631 22580 MANDAUE INTEGRATED MANPOWER SERVICES 836.14 P-102-1631 22580 MANDAUE INTEGRATED MANPOWER SERVICES 1,082.41 P-102-1631 22580 MANDAUE INTEGRATED MANPOWER SERVICES 572.13 P-102-1631 22580 MANDAUE INTEGRATED MANPOWER SERVICES 904.30 Subtotal - - - 7,790.46 Input VAT not supported by Invoices/ORs - 3082 ADVANCE SURFACE PROTECTION SPECIALIST 2,206.56 - BN-24 INNOVE COMMUNICATIONS 4,560.00 - Subtotal - - - 6,766.56 2. Importation of goods Input VAT supported by IEIRD but without a validation of the payment, or Statement of Settlement of Duties and Taxes (SSDT) or Bureau of Customs (BOC) official receipt P-103-1 to 2 114960325 PT KIDECO JAYA AGUNG 4,080,063.00 P-103-12 118730841 KSB SINGAPORE PTE LTD 696,349.00 P-103-13 to 15 116409413 SUN MACHINERY and TRADING, INC. 16,718.00 P-103-16 to 18 116409465 KSB SINGAPORE PTE LTD 32,066.00 P-103-19 120767963 KSB SINGAPORE PTE LTD 10,760.00 P-103-20 118553757 YASHIMA and CO. LTD 156,378.00 P-103-21 to 22 118553741 FUJI TRADING COL LTD 84,431.00 P-103-23 to 25 118553705 IANDN INT'L. 94,632.00 P-103-26 to 28 120751303 NOMAX LTD 1,552,713.00 P-103-29 to 31 120751303 NOMAX LTD 456,619.00 P-103-32 to 34 118553522 FUJI TRADING CO. LTD 221,585.00 P-103-35 to 37 121773251 I AND N INTERNATIONAL 127,011.00 P-103-38 121773084 PT SION MANDI 2,654,991.00 P-103-39 to 40 123885002 HWAN TAI CEMENT PRODUCTS CO. LTD 2,963,129.00 P-103-41 to 43 123884993 HWAN TAI CEMENT PRODUCTS LTD 798.00 P-103-44 to 45 121773102 PT SION ANUGRAH MANDIRI 2,616,500.00 P-103-48 121773181 PT SION ANUGRAH MANDIRI 3,530,132.00 P-103-55 to 57 018180153 FORMOSA HEAVY INDUSTRIES CORPORATION 3,388,641.00 P-103-58 to 60 121853286 PT SION ANUGRAH MANDIRI 3,521,760.00 P-103-61 121853313 PT SION ANUGRAH MANDIRI 3,492,053.00 P-103-62 to 63 116603094 FORMOSA HEAVY INDUSTRIES CORPORATION 1,371,231.00 P-103-64 to 65 116603103 FORMOSA HEAVY INDUSTRIES CORPORATION 1,852,731.00 P-103-66 116603146 LONJING HONGKONG COMPANY LIMITED 50,577.00 - 121853286 PT SION ANUGRAH MANDIRI (520.00) Subtotal 4,992,334.00 2,409,980.00 2,782,002.00 22,787,032.00 Total 6,399,043.38 4,801,969.49 3,237,636.90 23,384,877.11 With regard to the claimed P780,012.28 amortization of input VAT on purchases of capital goods exceeding P1Million, the same shall also be disallowed because petitioner failed to submit before this Court VAT invoices/official receipts in support of its previous year/s' purchases of capital goods exceeding P1Million. Also, petitioner failed to identify which among its domestic purchases of goods and services 45 for the year 2012 pertain to its capital goods purchases exceeding P1Million. AaCTcI Therefore, out of petitioner's reported input VAT for the four quarters of CY 2012 in the total amount of P148,611,453.13, only the amount of P92,646,682.50 represents valid input VAT, computed below: 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total Input VAT per VAT Return P34,954,624.65 P22,487,848.21 P26,351,906.55 P64,817,073.72 P148,611,453.13 Less: Disallowances Per ICPA report P2,840,411.60 P203,771.91 P3,190,823.34 P11,126,224.62 P17,361,231.47 Per Court's further verification Input VAT on domestic purchases of goods and services and importation of goods 6,399,043.38 4,801,969.49 3,237,636.90 23,384,877.11 37,823,526.88 Amortization of input VAT on capital goods purchases exceeding P1Million 188,726.27 194,998.17 184,237.51 212,050.33 780,012.28 Total Disallowances P9,428,181.25 P5,200,739.57 P6,612,697.75 P34,723,152.06 P55,964,770.63 Substantiated Input VAT P25,526,443.40 P17,287,108.64 P19,739,208.80 P30,093,921.66 P92,646,682.50 However, considering that petitioner had other kinds of sales, i.e., sales to private entities, sales to government and exempt sales, and its input VAT cannot be directly attributed to specific sales, the Court shall allocate the valid input VAT proportionately on the basis of the volume of petitioner's sales pursuant to Section 112 (A) of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, computed as follows: 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total Sales per VAT return Vatable Sales/Receipts-Private P142,290,065.92 P213,266,370.23 P179,525,702.25 P172,096,239.00 P707,178,377.40 Sales to Government 15,498,374.80 15,220,068.60 14,385,534.60 13,574,278.83 58,678,256.83 Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts 542,930,177.94 501,923,964.17 430,079,791.55 306,678,113.10 1,781,612,046.76 Exempt Sales/Receipts 1,082,505.00 1,138,810.24 1,133,588.81 1,211,682.00 4,566,586.05 Total P701,801,123.66 P731,549,213.24 P625,124,617.21 P493,560,312.93 P2,552,035,267.04 Allocation Factor (Percentage of each type of sales to total sales) : Vatable Sales/Receipts-Private 20.2749841% 29.1527031% 28.7183863% 34.8683301% 27.7103685% Sales to Government 2.2083713% 2.0805256% 2.3012267% 2.7502776% 2.2992730% Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts 77.3623979% 68.6111003% 68.7990490% 62.1358940% 69.8114195% Exempt Sales/Receipts 0.1542467% 0.1556710% 0.1813381% 0.2454983% 0.1789390% Total 100.0000000% 100.0000000% 100.0000000% 100.0000000% 100.0000000% Valid Input VAT P25,526,443.40 P17,287,108.64 P19,739,208.80 P30,093,921.66 P92,646,682.50 Input VAT Allocation Per Each Type of Sales (Allocation Factor multiplied by Valid Input VAT): Vatable Sales/Receipts-Private P5,175,482.33 P5,039,659.46 P5,668,782.23 P10,493,247.93 P26,377,171.95 Sales to Government 563,718.66 359,662.72 454,243.94 827,666.39 2,205,291.71 Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts 19,747,868.72 11,860,875.44 13,580,387.93 18,699,127.28 63,888,259.37 Exempt Sales/Receipts 39,373.69 26,911.02 35,794.70 73,880.06 175,959.47 Total P25,526,443.40 P17,287,108.64 P19,739,208.80 P30,093,921.66 P92,646,682.50 Since the input VAT allocated to VATable sales/receipts-private entities is not enough to cover petitioner's output tax due for each quarter, the input VAT allocated to zero-rated sales/receipts shall be utilized to pay for the remaining output tax, as shown below: acEHCD 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total Output VAT Due P17,074,807.91 P25,591,964.43 P21,543,084.27 P20,651,548.68 P84,861,405.29 Less: Input VAT allocated to VATable sales/receipts 5,175,482.33 5,039,659.46 5,668,782.23 10,493,247.93 26,377,171.95 Balance of Output VAT Due P11,899,325.58 P20,552,304.97 P15,874,302.04 P10,158,300.75 P58,484,233.34 Less: Input VAT allocated to Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts 19,747,868.72 11,860,875.44 13,580,387.93 18,699,127.28 63,888,259.37 Output VAT Still Due/(Excess Input VAT) P(7,848,543.14) P8,691,429.53 P2,293,914.11 P(8,540,826.53) P(5,404,026.03) Based from the foregoing, petitioner had excess input VAT for the CY 2012 in the amount of P5,404,026.03, which can be attributed to its entire declared zero-rated sales/receipts in the amount of P1,781,612,046.76. However, as stated earlier, petitioner was able to properly substantiate only the amount of P1,360,707,687.46 out of its total declared zero-rated sales/receipts of P1,781,612,046.76. Thus, the input VAT attributable to petitioner's valid zero-rated sales/receipts of P1,360,707,687.46 amounts only to P4,127,329.38, as computed below: Excess Input VAT Attributable to Declared Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts P5,404,026.03 Divided by Declared Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts 1,781,612,046.76 Multiplied by Valid Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts x 1,360,707,687.46 Excess Input VAT Attributable to Valid Zero-Rated Sales/Receipts P4,127,329.39 Even though the claimed input VAT was carried over by petitioner in its succeeding Quarterly VAT Returns, 46 the same remained unutilized until it was deducted in its Quarterly VAT Return for the fourth quarter of 2013 as "VAT Refund/TCC claimed" 47 from the total available input tax of P382,255,748.72. 48 Thus, the claimed input taxes for the four quarters of CY 2012 could not have been carried over/utilized in the succeeding first quarter of 2014. 49 EcTCAD In fine, petitioner has sufficiently proven its entitlement to a refund in the amount of P4,127,329.39 representing its unutilized excess input VAT for the four taxable quarters of CY 2012, which is attributable to its zero-rated sales/receipts for the same period. WHEREFORE , the instant Petition for Review is PARTIALLY GRANTED . Accordingly, respondent is ORDERED TO REFUND to petitioner the amount of P4,127,329.39 representing its unutilized excess input VAT for the four quarters of taxable year 2012 attributable to its zero-rated sales/receipts. SO ORDERED. (SGD.) JUANITO C. CASTAEDA, JR. Associate Justice Caesar A. Casanova, J. , concurs. Catherine T. Manahan, J. , with Concurring and Dissenting Opinion. Separate Opinions MANAHAN , J., concurring and dissenting opinion : I concur with the ponencia 's conclusion that administrative and judicial claims for refund were timely filed. However, I respectfully dissent to the evidentiary value given to the Board of Investments (BOI) Certification submitted by Toledo Power Corporation (Toledo) to prove that its sales to Carmen Copper Corporation are zero-rated. The said BOI Certification 1 provides as follows: This is to certify that CARMEN COPPER CORPORATION is registered with the Board of Investments (BOI) pursuant to Executive Order No. 226, otherwise known as the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987, with the following data: xxx xxx xxx Information is hereby given that the firm exported 100% of its total sales volume/value for the calendar year covering January 01 to December 31, 2011 based on the attached documents . . . submitted to BOI, summarized as follows: xxx xxx xxx This Certification is valid from January 01 to December 31, 2012 unless sooner revoked by the BOI Governing Board for any or all of the following grounds: (a) Failure of the herein registered enterprise to comply with any of its BOI registration terms, commitments, and conditions; (b) Failure to export 100% in any of the instances set forth in Section 2 of RMO No. 9-2000; (c) Submission of fraudulent documents; and (d) Failure to submit Audited Financial Statements, Annual Income Tax Return and Annual Report on Actual Operations for the year 2011. (Underscoring supplied) SDHTEC It is my view that in the instant case, the BOI Certification issued on January 30, 2012 does not attest to the 100% export sale of Carmen Copper Corporation (Carmen Copper) for calendar year 2012. At most, the BOI Certification attests that for the period of January 1 to December 31, 2011, Carmen Copper exported 100% of its total sales volume. The validity period of January 1 to December 31, 2012 indicated in the BOI Certification of Carmen Copper made the majority conclude that the claim for refund pertaining to the four taxable quarters of taxable year 2012 falls within the coverage of the Certification's validity period. This may well be true if the purpose is to accord zero-rating status to sales made during the covered period, but it does not prove that Carmen Copper, as a BOI-registered exporter, exported 100% of its products for the period January 1 to December 31, 2012. Thus, Toledo submitted a BOI Certification from Carmen Copper, its BOI-registered buyer, which failed to prove that Carmen Copper exported 100% of its sales from January 1 to December 31, 2012. Hence, Toledo failed to prove an essential aspect of its claim for refund/issuance of tax credit certificate. Considering the foregoing, Toledo's entitlement to refund should be adjusted accordingly. Footnotes 1. Exhibit "P-1", docket, vol. II, p. 850. 2. Exhibit "P-2", docket, vol. II, pp. 855-890. 3. Exhibits "P-3" and "P-3-A", docket, vol. II, pp. 891-894. 4. Exhibit "P-4", docket, vol. II, p. 895. 5. Exhibits "P-9" and "P-10", docket, vol. II, pp. 905-917. 6. Docket, vol. I, pp. 122-136. 7. Docket, vol. I, p. 138. 8. Order dated June 27, 2014, docket, vol. I. p. 355. 9. Motion to Reset Pre-Trial Conference (Set on July 3, 2014), filed on June 24, 2014, docket, vol. I, pp. 139-142. 10. Notice of Resetting, docket, vol. I, p. 357. 11. Docket, vol. I, pp. 276-287. 12. Docket, vol. I, pp. 358-361. 13. Motion to Avail the Provisions of Rule 13 of the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals, filed on June 25, 2014, docket, vol. I, pp. 288-291. 14. Minutes of the Hearing dated August 28, 2014, docket, vol. I, p. 364. 15. Docket, vol. I, pp. 371-376. 16. Docket, vol. I, pp. 378-383. 17. Minutes of the Hearing dated October 1, 2014, docket, vol. I, p. 384; Exhibit "P-60", docket, vol. I, pp. 150-165; Minutes of the Hearing dated February 16, 2015, docket, vol. I, p. 462; Exhibit "P-150", docket, vol. II, pp. 1009-1014. 18. Minutes of the Hearing dated November 17, 2014, docket, vol. I, p. 388; Exhibit "P-61", docket, vol. I, pp. 318-324. 19. Minutes of the Hearing dated December 1, 2014, docket, vol. I, p. 420; Exhibit "P-142", docket, vol. I, pp. 406-419; and Minutes of the Hearing dated January 27, 2016, docket, vol. III, p. 1445; Exhibit "P-209", docket, vol. III, pp. 1110-1115. 20. Minutes of the Hearing dated March 18, 2015, docket, vol. II, p. 717; Exhibit "P-152", docket, vol. II, pp. 1033-1037. 21. Minutes of the Hearing dated May 20, 2015, docket, vol. II, p. 776; Exhibit "P-155", docket, vol. II, pp. 728-733. However, Exhibit "P-155" was not included in petitioner's Formal Offer of Evidence or Supplemental Offer of Evidence. 22. Docket, vol. II, pp. 814-833. 23. Docket, vol. IV, pp. 1450-1455. 24. Docket, vol. IV, pp. 1796-1797. 25. Minutes of the Hearing dated April 25, 2016, docket, vol. IV, p. 1799. 26. Resolution dated June 29, 2016, docket, vol. IV, p. 1841. 27. Docket, vol. IV, pp. 1814-1839. 28. Docket, vol. IV, pp. 1811-1812. 29. Statement of the Issues, JSFI, docket, vol. I, p. 372. 30. Exhibits "P-9" and "P-10", docket, vol. II, pp. 905-917. 31. Rohm Apollo Semiconductor Philippines vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , G.R. No. 168950, January 14, 2015. 32. Exhibit "P-4", docket, vol. II, p. 895. 33. Exhibits "P-1" and "P-2", docket, vol. II, pp. 850-890. 34. Exhibits "P-3" and "P-3-A", docket, vol. II, pp. 891-894. 35. G.R. No. 150154, August 9, 2005. 36. Now 12%. 37. Exhibit "P-105". 38. Exhibits "P-105-1" to "P-105-358". 39. Exhibit "P-11", docket, vol. II, pp. 918-920. 40. Exhibit "P-7", docket, vol. II, p. 903. 41. Exhibit "P-11", docket, vol. II, pp. 918-920. 42. Exhibit "P-102". 43. Exhibit "P-103". 44. Exhibits "P-102-1" to "P-102-3465" and "P-103-1" to "P-103-66". 45. Exhibit "P-102". 46. Exhibits "P-25" to "P-26", "P-28", and "P-29", docket, vol. II, pp. 940-943 and 946-949. 47. Exhibit "P-29", line 23D, docket, vol. II, p. 949. 48. Exhibit "P-29", line 22, docket, vol. II, p. 948. 49. Exhibit "P-30", docket, vol. II, p. 950. MANAHAN, J., concurring and dissenting opinion: 1. Docket, CTA Case No. 8792, Vol. 2, Exhibit "P-11" Letter from BOI with attached Certification, pp. 918-920.