People v. QNX Solutions, Inc.

FIRST DIVISION [C.T.A. CRIM. CASE NO. O-990. December 1, 2023.] For: Violation of Section 255, in relation to Sections 253 and 256 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff , vs. QNX SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED, and its responsible corporate officers ANGELO R. BALILI (President), SANTIAGO T. PULIDO (Treasurer) and GERTRUDES S. TAMAYO (Corporate Secretary), (Unit 1607, Herrera Tower, Valero Street, Salcedo Village, Makati City) , accused . RESOLUTION This resolves plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Resolution dated 09 August 2023) , 1 filed through registered mail on September 25, 2023, and received by the Court on October 2, 2023. HTcADC Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of this Court's Resolution 2 issued on August 9, 2023 (Assailed Resolution) , the dispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE , premises considered, CTA Crim. Case No. O-990 is DISMISSED on the ground of prescription. Accordingly, the Alias Warrants of Arrest issued against accused ANGELO R. BALILI , SANTIAGO T. PULIDO and GERTRUDES S. TAMAYO , all dated March 2, 2023, are RECALLED and SET ASIDE . SO ORDERED. In asking for a reconsideration, plaintiff avers that it received a copy of the Assailed Resolution on September 8, 2023. However, the record 3 reveals that plaintiff received a copy on August 16, 2023. Section 1, Rule 15 of the Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals (RRCTA), as amended, provides: "SECTION 1. Who may and when to file motion . Any aggrieved party may seek a reconsideration or new trial of any decision, resolution or order of the Court by filing a motion for reconsideration or new trial within fifteen days from the date of receipt of notice of the decision, resolution or order of the Court in question." (Emphasis supplied) The rule is and has been that the period for filing a motion for reconsideration is non-extendible . 4 If no motion for reconsideration is filed on time, the judgment or final order of the court becomes final and executory . 5 As the record reveals, plaintiff received a copy of the Assailed Resolution on August 16, 2023. Hence, counting fifteen (15) days therefrom, plaintiff had until August 31, 2023 to file its motion for reconsideration. But for reasons only known to it, plaintiff only filed its motion on September 25, 2023, which is beyond the 15-day reglementary period to appeal. CAIHTE WHEREFORE , premises considered, plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Resolution dated 09 August 2023) is DENIED , for being filed out of time. SO ORDERED. Roman G. del Rosario, P.J. and Lanee S. Cui-David, J. , concur. Jean Marie A. Bacorro-Villena, J. , is on leave. Footnotes 1. Docket, pp. 125-131. 2. Docket, pp. 119-124. 3. Notice of Resolution , Docket, p. 118. 4. Apex Mining Co., Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue and Court of Appeals , G.R. No. 122472, October 20, 2005. 5. Far East Bank & Trust Company vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , G.R. No. 149589, September 15, 2006.