Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Acquire Asia Pacific Philippines, Inc.

EN BANC [C.T.A. EB CASE NO. 1122. March 30, 2015.] (C.T.A. Case No. 8465) COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , petitioner , vs . ACQUIRE ASIA PACIFIC PHILIPPINES, INC. , respondent . RESOLUTION CASANOVA , J p : Submitted for consideration is petitioner's "Motion for Reconsideration (to the Notice of Decision dated November 26, 2014)" filed on December 10, 2014, with respondent's "Comment (on Motion for Reconsideration dated 10 December 2014)" filed through registered mail on February 16, 2015. In her Motion, petitioner alleges that the Court En Banc erred in its Decision 1 ("assailed Decision") when it declared that respondent was able to fully substantiate its claim for refund despite failing to submit certain documents required by Revenue Officer Mariflor Ayen-Exmundo of RDO No. 41 in her Letter 2 dated June 13, 2012. Petitioner likewise asserts that respondent failed to exhaust administrative remedies. On the other hand, respondent asserts that the arguments raised by petitioner are mere reiterations of the arguments sufficiently passed upon and decided by the Court En Banc in the assailed Decision. Respondent claims that petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration should be considered pro forma . After due consideration, We find no merit in petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration. Upon careful scrutiny of the arguments proffered by petitioner in her Motion and, as correctly pointed out by respondent, We find that the discussions therein are mere rehash of the same facts and issues which have already been analyzed and passed upon by the Court En Banc in the assailed Decision. The grounds raised by the petitioner in her motion did not raise anything new to merit reconsideration thereof. Hence, as stated in the fallo of the Decision promulgated on November 26, 2014, the Court En Banc finds no cogent justification to disturb the findings and conclusions reached in the Decision and Resolution dated December 13, 2013 and February 5, 2014, respectively, rendered by the CTA Third Division in CTA Case No. 8465. WHEREFORE , petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration (to the Notice of Decision dated November 26, 2014) is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED . aTcSID (SGD.) CAESAR A. CASANOVA Associate Justice Roman G. del Rosario, P.J., Juanito C. Castaeda, Jr., Lovell R. Bautista, Erlinda P. Uy, Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorino, Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas and Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban, JJ., concur. Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, J., is on leave. Footnotes 1. Dated November 26, 2014, CTA En Banc Rollo , pp. 72-82. 2. Marked as Exhibit "1-b" for Respondent (petitioner herein) , BIR Records.